Skip to main content

CyberPanel CVE-2026-29811

| EUVDEUVD-2026-77075 HIGH
Comparison Using Wrong Factors (CWE-1025)
2026-09-13 mitre GHSA-2m73-7wxp-874w
7.7
CVSS 3.1 · Vendor: mitre
View

Attack ChainAIDerived

Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain

  1. Access
    Authenticate as low-privilege CyberPanel user
  2. Delivery
    Request child domain listing via fetchChildDomainsMain
  3. Exploit
    ORM alias filter fails to exclude target domains (CWE-1025)
  4. Execution
    Missing ownership rejection in checkOwnership falls through
  5. Impact
    Access or modify cross-account domain records without authorization

Vulnerability Assessment

Weakness
CWE
Exploitation Conditions

Requires an active authenticated session on CyberPanel with at least low-privilege (reseller or user-level) credentials - unauthenticated exploitation is not supported by the CVSS PR:L metric. The cross-account integrity impact (S:C) is contingent on a multi-tenant CyberPanel deployment where multiple accounts share the same panel instance and have configured child or alias domains. The vulnerability is confined to the child-domain management functionality (fetchChildDomainsMain and checkOwnership). Limiting factors: authentication is mandatory; single-account or single-tenant deployments expose reduced cross-account risk; the attacker must interact specifically with domain listing and ownership-check code paths. There is no evidence of remotely exploitable pre-auth attack surface.

Impact

The vendor-provided CVSS 3.1 vector AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N scores 7.7 (High). The S:C (Changed Scope) and I:H (High Integrity) pairing is the most significant signal: it implies a low-privilege authenticated user can affect domain records outside their own account on shared multi-tenant installations. AC:L indicates no exploitation complexity beyond possessing valid credentials. No EPSS score is supplied; the issue is absent from CISA KEV; no POC is publicly identified. The combination of no active exploitation evidence and a logic-level bug (not a memory-safety flaw) places real-world risk below what the raw CVSS score implies for single-tenant deployments. However, hosting providers running CyberPanel as a shared control panel for multiple resellers or end-users face meaningful cross-tenant risk. The missing/incorrect CPE (n/a) means this will not be detected by standard NVD-based vulnerability scanners, creating a blind spot for automated tooling.

Exploit ScenarioDerived

An attacker with a low-privilege reseller or end-user account on a multi-tenant CyberPanel instance calls the fetchChildDomainsMain endpoint. Because the ORM alias filter misbehaves and the ownership check lacks a proper rejection branch, the attacker retrieves or manipulates child/alias domain records belonging to other accounts on the same panel, altering DNS or hosting configurations across tenant boundaries without authorization.

This Week Schedule remediation this week. Why: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9).
Patch available 0.3% exploitation probability (EPSS)

Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.

Alert me

AnalysisAIv1 – Sep 13, 2026

Improper access control in CyberPanel before 2.4.4 allows an authenticated low-privilege user to bypass alias-domain filtering logic in the child-domain management subsystem, with potential cross-account integrity impact. The flaw stems from using a Django ORM .filter(alais=0) call to identify non-alias child domains - a comparison that can behave differently than a Python-level equality check - combined with a missing ownership rejection branch in checkOwnership() that allowed certain code paths to fall through without denying access. The CVSS S:C/I:H vector indicates the impact can cross tenant boundaries on shared CyberPanel instances. No public exploit is identified at time of analysis and the issue is not listed in CISA KEV.

RemediationAI

Upgrade CyberPanel to version 2.4.4 or later, which incorporates fix commit 0a099b1b193946555fbdd387a28486b1521f9961 (https://github.com/usmannasir/cyberpanel/commit/0a099b1b193946555fbdd387a28486b1521f9961). The patch replaces the ORM filter childdomains_set.filter(alais=0) with a Python-level if child.alais == 0: guard in websiteFunctions/website.py and adds the missing else: return 0 rejection branch in plogical/acl.py. No vendor-documented workaround is available. As a compensating control for deployments that cannot immediately patch, restrict CyberPanel access to trusted authenticated users only and consider disabling reseller/multi-tenant domain delegation features until the upgrade is applied; note this degrades usability for hosting providers and does not address the underlying logic flaw.

Affected VersionsENISA

CyberPanel 0 <2.4.4

Affected Packages

euvd cyberpanel fix: 2.4.4

Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)

Affects your stack

Affects 1 package in euvd

Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.

Technical ContextAI · show details

CyberPanel is a Python/Django web hosting control panel. The root cause is CWE-1025 (Comparison Using Wrong Factors): fetchChildDomainsMain() in websiteFunctions/website.py used web.childdomains_set.filter(alais=0) to exclude alias entries from a domain listing, where alais is itself a misspelling of 'alias' persisted in the schema. Django ORM field lookups can behave differently from in-Python attribute comparisons depending on field type coercion, queryset lazy evaluation, and database-level casting; relying on an ORM filter here instead of an explicit if child.alais == 0: guard introduced the logic gap. A separate, parallel fix in plogical/acl.py added a missing else: return 0 branch to checkOwnership(), closing a code path that could fall through without properly rejecting access. The NVD CPE is listed as cpe:2.3:a:n/a:n/a:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* - a placeholder with no detection value - while EUVD-2026-77075 correctly identifies the affected range as CyberPanel 0 through (not including) 2.4.4.

Know when Python gets its next vulnerability

  • Watch products and get an email when something new is published
  • Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
  • Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources

No credit card · 7-day full trial

Severity by source

Vendor (mitre) PRIMARY 7.7 HIGH
AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N
vuln.today AI 7.7 HIGH

Network-accessible panel, low-complexity logic bypass, authentication required (PR:L); S:C and I:H reflect cross-account domain integrity impact on shared instances; C:N because no data exfiltration path is established.

3.1 AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N
4.0 AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

Primary rating from Vendor (mitre).

CVSS VectorVendor: mitre

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
Low
User Interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Lifecycle Timeline

4
Patch available
Sep 13, 2026 - 21:01 EUVD
CVSS changed
Sep 13, 2026 - 20:22 NVD
7.7 (HIGH)
CVE Published
Sep 13, 2026 - 00:00 cve.org
UNKNOWN (no severity yet)
CVE Published
Sep 13, 2026 - 00:00 cve.org
HIGH 7.7

DescriptionCVE.org

CyberPanel before 2.4.4 attempts to detect an "alais" domain (i.e., a second domain that serves the same content as a primary domain; normally spelled "alias") via an ORM query filter rather than a Python "if" statement.

Executive ViewAI

Why It Matters

CyberPanel versions prior to 2.4.4 contain an access control bypass allowing authenticated users to gain unauthorized access to child domains belonging to other customer accounts in shared hosting environments. This cross-account vulnerability threatens data integrity and security across multiple customer organizations relying on CyberPanel for domain management. Hosting providers and organizations operating multi-tenant CyberPanel deployments require immediate patching to mitigate the risk of account compromise and unauthorized domain modifications.

Business Impact: High
Compensating Controls

Apply vendor patch: CyberPanel 2.4.4

Threat Intelligence Overview

EPSS Score
0.3%
Top 83% exploitable
Prevalence
Medium
open-source web hosting panel with active deployment on VPS and small hosting providers
Data Quality
6 sources
Confidence: High
EUVD NVD CVE.org EPSS Vulnrichment GitHub VulDB

How this decision was reached

The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.

SignalValue
Severity HIGH
CISA KEV No
Public POC No
EPSS 0.3%
Patch available Yes
Active threat No
Deciding rule
HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9)
What every action level means
Emergency Immediate action required. Criteria: CRITICAL + in CISA KEV (actively exploited) without patch, OR CRITICAL + EPSS > 30% without patch, OR CRITICAL + active threat signals without patch.
Act Now Prioritize within 24-48h. Criteria: in KEV with patch available, OR CRITICAL + public POC, OR HIGH + EPSS > 10%, OR CRITICAL + active threat, OR any CRITICAL severity.
This Week Schedule remediation this week. Criteria: HIGH severity (CVSS 7.0-8.9). Patch within normal change window.
This Month Plan within 30 days. Criteria: MEDIUM severity (CVSS 4.0-6.9), lower exploitation probability. Include in regular patch cycle.
Monitor Track and reassess. Criteria: LOW severity (CVSS 0.1-3.9), minimal exploitation risk. No immediate action needed.

SSVC AssessmentENISA

SSVC Decision
Scheduled
Exploitation
None
System Exposure· derived
Open
Automatable
No
Human Impact
High
Technical Impact
Partial

Priority Score

38
Low Medium High Critical
KEV: 0
EPSS: 0
CVSS: +38
PoC: 0
Weaponized: 0
Threat intel: 0
Gov advisory: 0

More in Python

View all
CVE-2025-24016 CRITICAL POC
9.9 Feb 10

Wazuh SIEM platform versions 4.4.0 through 4.9.0 contain an unsafe deserialization vulnerability in the DistributedAPI t

CVE-2025-27520 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Apr 04

BentoML version 1.4.2 and earlier contains an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability through insecure deser

CVE-2025-2945 CRITICAL POC
9.9 Apr 03

pgAdmin 4 contains critical remote code execution vulnerabilities in the Query Tool download and Cloud Deployment endpoi

CVE-2013-5093 MEDIUM POC
6.8 Sep 27

The renderLocalView function in render/views.py in graphite-web in Graphite 0.9.5 through 0.9.10 uses the pickle Python

CVE-2025-32375 CRITICAL POC
9.8 Apr 09

BentoML is a Python library for building online serving systems optimized for AI apps and model inference. Rated critica

CVE-2014-0224 HIGH POC
7.4 Jun 05

OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h does not properly restrict processing of ChangeCiph

CVE-2024-21644 HIGH POC
7.5 Jan 08

pyLoad download manager version prior to 0.5.0b3.dev77 exposes the Flask SECRET_KEY through an unauthenticated endpoint.

CVE-2026-33017 CRITICAL POC
9.3 Mar 17

Langflow (a visual LLM pipeline builder) contains a critical unauthenticated code execution vulnerability (CVE-2026-3301

CVE-2017-9462 HIGH POC
8.8 Jun 06

In Mercurial before 4.1.3, "hg serve --stdio" allows remote authenticated users to launch the Python debugger, and conse

CVE-2026-49869 CRITICAL POC
10.0 Jun 26

Unauthenticated remote code execution affects Kestra OSS (the open-source event-driven orchestration platform) prior to

CVE-2026-39987 CRITICAL POC
9.3 Apr 08

Unauthenticated remote code execution in Marimo ≤0.20.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary system commands via the `/

CVE-2024-21645 MEDIUM POC
5.3 Jan 08

pyLoad is the free and open-source Download Manager written in pure Python. Rated medium severity (CVSS 5.3), this vulne

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy