Unsafe variable evaluation in email templates
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- 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: 0.28% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: pretix pretix 2025.10.0, 2025.10.2, 2025.9.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to pretix pretix 2025.10.0, 2025.10.2, 2025.9.0 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
Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name} is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's name for the final email. This mechanism contained two security-relevant bugs: * It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}. This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates (usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive information from the system configuration, including even database passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were not fully effective for the email subject. * Placeholders in subjects and plain text bodies of emails were wrongfully evaluated twice. Therefore, if the first evaluation of a placeholder again contains a placeholder, this second placeholder was rendered. This allows the rendering of placeholders controlled by the ticket buyer, and therefore the exploitation of the first issue as a ticket buyer. Luckily, the only buyer-controlled placeholder available in pretix by default (that is not validated in a way that prevents the issue) is {invoice_company}, which is very unusual (but not impossible) to be contained in an email subject template. In addition to broadening the attack surface of the first issue, this could theoretically also leak information about an order to one of the attendees within that order. However, we also consider this scenario very unlikely under typical conditions. Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg https://docs.pretix.eu/self-hosting/config/ file.
- Published
- Feb 16, 2026
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 19th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-627
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · rami.io
- 7.5
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/RE:L/U:Red
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 |
|---|---|---|
| pretix | pretix | cpe:2.3:a:pretix:pretix |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- pretix pretix4.16.0 and later · before 2026.1.1
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (rami.io). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
pretix pretix
- 4.16.0 and later · before 2025.9.0affected · python
- 2025.9.0 and later · before 2025.10.0affected · pythonfixed in 2025.9.4
- 2025.10.0 and later · before 2026.1.0affected · pythonfixed in 2025.10.2
- 2026.1.0 and later · before 2026.1.1affected · python
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPI | pretix | from 2025.10.0 · before 2025.10.2 | 2025.10.2 |
| PyPI | pretix | from 2026.1.0 · before 2026.1.1 | 2026.1.1 |
| PyPI | pretix | from 4.16.0 · before 2026.1.1 | 2026.1.1 |
| PyPI | pretix | before 2025.9.4 | 2025.9.4 |
Same product
pretix: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2024-27447pretix before 2024.1.1 mishandles file validation.39Monitor
- CVE-2026-57532Malicious HTML content contained in the layout specification of a PDF
ticket or badge layout was executed when the PDF editor is opened in 35Monitor
- CVE-2026-13602Session takeover vulnerability30Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-13742Nov 27, 2025 · Limited HTML injection in emails9Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-14881Dec 19, 2025 · Insecure direct object reference15Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-5600Apr 8, 2026 · A new API endpoint introduced in pretix 2025 that is supposed to
return all check-in events of a specific event in fact returns all
check-22Monitor
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 |
|---|---|---|
| pretix pretix | 2025.10.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
| pretix pretix | 2025.10.2 | Vendor (CNA) |
| pretix pretix | 2025.9.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
| pretix pretix | 2025.9.4 | Vendor (CNA) |
| pretix pretix | 2026.1.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
| pretix pretix | 2026.1.1 | Vendor (CNA) |
| PyPI:pretix | 2025.10.2 | Package registry (OSV) |
| PyPI:pretix | 2025.9.4 | Package registry (OSV) |
| PyPI:pretix | 2026.1.1 | 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.
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.
No commit or PR link among the references.
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.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-627 · Dynamic Variable EvaluationCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:L/U:Red
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
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.