Password of talk conversations can be bruteforced in Nextcloud
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: 0.59% (FIRST EPSS).
- 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.
- No fixed version is recorded, but the references include a patch (commit or PR) link.
Low priority for now. See the fix and affected versions sections below.
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
Nextcloud talk is a chat module for the Nextcloud server platform. In affected versions brute force protection of public talk conversation passwords can be bypassed, as there was an endpoint validating the conversation password without registering bruteforce attempts. It is recommended that the Nextcloud Talk app is upgraded to 15.0.8, 16.0.6 or 17.1.1. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
- Published
- Oct 16, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.5% · 47th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-307
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 · 0.5%
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
- 4.3
- agree
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
- No fixed version yet
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 |
|---|---|---|
| nextcloud | talk | cpe:2.3:a:nextcloud:talk |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- nextcloud talk15.0.0 and later · before 15.0.8
- nextcloud talk16.0.0 and later · before 16.0.6
- nextcloud talk17.0.0 and later · before 17.1.1
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.
nextcloud security-advisories
- >= 15.0.0, < 15.0.8, >= 16.0.0, < 16.0.6, >= 17.0.0, < 17.1.1affected
Same product
nextcloud: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2020-8180A too lax check in Nextcloud Talk 6.0.4, 7.0.2 and 8.0.7 allowed a code injection when a not correctly sanitized talk command was added by a40Plan
- CVE-2023-39957Path traversal allows tricking the Talk Android app into writing files into it's root directory31Monitor
- CVE-2021-32689Nextcloud Talk not properly disassociating users from chats after account deletion26Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-28845Mar 31, 2023 · Chat room membership disclosed via autocompletion in Nextcloud talk14Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-30540Apr 17, 2023 · Chat poll data can still be queried from API after purging history in Nextcloud talk17Monitor
- Later →CVE-2025-66556Dec 5, 2025 · Nextcloud talk allows participants to blindly delete poll drafts of other users by ID17Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
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.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
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
The product’s vendor appears in a public program. Matched by name; verify the scope text in the program.
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-307 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication AttemptsCVSS 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)
- Dictionary-based Password AttackCAPEC-16likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Brute ForcingCAPEC-49likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Domain CredentialsCAPEC-560likelihood: High · High
- Password SprayingCAPEC-565likelihood: High · High
- Credential StuffingCAPEC-600likelihood: High · High
- Use of Known Kerberos CredentialsCAPEC-652likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Operating System CredentialsCAPEC-653likelihood: High · High
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.