CVE-2023-22487: Post mentions can be used to read any post on the forum without access control
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 17/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.68% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 52.7% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: flarum/mentions (Packagist) 1.6.3.
- Severity is disputed: the assigning authority (CNA) scores it 7.7, NVD 4.3.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to flarum/mentions (Packagist) 1.6.3 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Flarum is a forum software for building communities. Using the mentions feature provided by the flarum/mentions extension, users can mention any post ID on the forum with the special `@"<username>"#p<id>` syntax. The following behavior never changes no matter if the actor should be able to read the mentioned post or not: A URL to the mentioned post is inserted into the actor post HTML, leaking its discussion ID and post number. The `mentionsPosts` relationship included in the `POST /api/posts` and `PATCH /api/posts/<id>` JSON responses leaks the full JSON:API payload of all mentioned posts without any access control. This includes the content, date, number and attributes added by other extensions. An attacker only needs the ability to create new posts on the forum to exploit the vulnerability. This works even if new posts require approval. If they have the ability to edit posts, the attack can be performed even more discreetly by using a single post to scan any size of database and hiding the attack post content afterward. The attack allows the leaking of all posts in the forum database, including posts awaiting approval, posts in tags the user has no access to, and private discussions created by other extensions like FriendsOfFlarum Byobu. This also includes non-comment posts like tag changes or renaming events. The discussion payload is not leaked but using the mention HTML payload it's possible to extract the discussion ID of all posts and combine all posts back together into their original discussions even if the discussion title remains unknown. All Flarum versions prior to 1.6.3 are affected. The vulnerability has been fixed and published as flarum/core v1.6.3. As a workaround, user can disable the mentions extension.
- Published
- Jan 11, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.6% · 52th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-284
Report tools
Action score
17
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 17 / 40 · 4.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.6%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 4.3
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 7.7
- 3.4 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| flarum | flarum | cpe:2.3:a:flarum:flarum |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- flarum flarumbefore 1.6.3
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
flarum framework
- < 1.6.3affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Packagist | flarum/mentions | before 1.6.3 | 1.6.3 |
Same product
flarum: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2021-32671XSS vulnerability with translator52Plan
- CVE-2019-13183Flarum before 0.1.0-beta.9 allows CSRF against all POST endpoints, as demonstrated by changing admin settings.35Monitor
- CVE-2019-11514User/Command/ConfirmEmailHandler.php in Flarum before 0.1.0-beta.8 mishandles invalidation of user email tokens.30Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2018-19133Nov 9, 2018 · In Flarum Core 0.1.0-beta.7.1, a serious leak can get everyone's email address.21Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-41938Nov 18, 2022 · Cross site scripting vulnerability with discussion titles in flarum21Monitor
- Later →CVE-2023-22488Jan 12, 2023 · Missing authorization in Flarum21Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Packagist:flarum/mentions | 1.6.3 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- low · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- Low
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-284 · Improper Access ControlCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Embedding Scripts within ScriptsCAPEC-19likelihood: High · High
- Malicious Logic InsertionCAPEC-441likelihood: Medium · High
- Modification of Windows Service ConfigurationCAPEC-478likelihood: Low · High
- Malicious Root CertificateCAPEC-479likelihood: Low · Low
- Intent SpoofCAPEC-502
- WebView ExposureCAPEC-503
- Data Injected During ConfigurationCAPEC-536likelihood: Low · High
- Incomplete Data Deletion in a Multi-Tenant EnvironmentCAPEC-546likelihood: Low · Medium
ATT&CK techniques
- RootkitT1014
- Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded PayloadsT1027.009
- Boot or Logon Initialization ScriptsT1037
- Taint shared contentT1080
- Server Software Component: Terminal Services DLLT1505.005
- Pre-OS Boot:BootkitT1542.003
- Create or Modify System ProcessT1543
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch AgentT1543.001
- Create or Modify System Process:Windows ServiceT1543.003
- Create or Modify System Process: Launch DaemonT1543.004
- Event Triggered Execution:Change Default File AssociationT1546.001
- Event Triggered Execution:.bash_profile and .bashrcT1546.004
- Event Triggered Execution: Accessibility FeaturesT1546.008
- Event Triggered Execution: Installer PackagesT1546.016
- Boot or Logon Autostart ExecutionT1547
- Boot or Logon Autostart Execution:Kernel Modules and ExtensionsT1547.006
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.