GHSA-v85w-3rf6-qvhj
Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessRequest email verification code for a workflow
-
DeliveryCapture or reuse the issued code
-
ExploitSubmit code to sensitive workflow (recovery/credential change)
-
ExecutionCode accepted due to missing purpose enforcement
-
ImpactTake over victim account
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A01:2025 - Broken Access Control
ASVS 5.0
V8 - Authorization Authorization logic validation
MITRE ATT&CK
1 technique across 1 tactic: Privilege Escalation The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires that the deployment uses Apache Answer's email-code-based workflows and that an attacker can obtain or replay a verification code issued for a different (less sensitive) email workflow, then present it to a sensitive workflow that does not validate the code's original purpose. The limiting factors: the attacker must possess a currently valid verification code and target a specific account's workflow, so this is not a trivial single-request remote compromise; it depends on the code-issuance and reuse timing rather than on any non-default configuration. Affected only through version 2.0.2 - upgrading to 2.0.3 removes the condition by enforcing code purpose. Authentication requirements not confirmed from available data because no CVSS vector was provided. |
| Impact | This is an authentication-logic flaw (email verification code purpose confusion) in Apache Answer through 2.0.2, rated moderate by the project. Critically, NO CVSS vector, EPSS score, KEV listing, SSVC decision, or POC was provided in the input - so quantitative exploitation signals are entirely ABSENT and cannot be cross-referenced. On available signals alone: there is no evidence of active exploitation (not in CISA KEV) and no public exploit identified, which argues against treating this as an emergency. However, the technical impact is severe when triggered - a code issued for one email workflow being accepted by another sensitive workflow can lead to full account takeover, which affects confidentiality and integrity of the victim account. The realistic priority is MODERATE: high impact but exploitation appears to require specific conditions (obtaining or reusing a valid verification code in a cross-workflow manner) rather than trivial remote compromise. Note the tension between the vendor's 'moderate' rating and the account-takeover outcome - my independent assessment (below) lands in the High band; this discrepancy likely reflects the vendor weighting the non-trivial preconditions for abusing the code. Verify exact exploitation preconditions with the Apache Answer security advisory, which was not fully available in this input. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An attacker obtains a verification code that Apache Answer issued for one email-based workflow (for example a benign email verification or confirmation step) and submits it to a different, more sensitive workflow (such as account recovery or credential change) that fails to enforce the code's original purpose. Because the code's intended context is not validated, the sensitive workflow accepts it and the attacker gains control of the targeted account. No public exploit code was identified at the time of analysis. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Oct 16, 2026
Account takeover in Apache Answer through 2.0.2 is possible because email verification codes issued for one workflow are accepted by other, more sensitive workflows - the code's original purpose is not enforced at redemption time. An attacker who obtains or replays a currently valid code from a lower-sensitivity email flow can present it to a sensitive flow tied to a target account, yielding high confidentiality and integrity impact (assessed CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N, rated moderate by the project). Exploitation is constrained rather than trivial: the deployment must be using Apache Answer's email-code-based workflows and the attacker must hold a valid, unexpired code targeting a specific account workflow; no public exploit code or confirmed active exploitation was identified at time of analysis.
RemediationAI
Upgrade to Apache Answer 2.0.3, which is the vendor-released patch that enforces verification-code purpose and eliminates the cross-workflow code acceptance; this is the only complete fix and should be treated as the primary action, referencing https://answer.apache.org and the oss-security advisory at https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2026/q4/200. If an immediate upgrade is not possible, reduce exposure by disabling or restricting email-code-based workflows wherever the platform allows it - in particular turn off self-service email/password change and alternate verification paths and force administrative handling of those changes. The trade-off is loss of self-service account recovery and added administrator workload. Complement this by shortening verification-code lifetime and enforcing single-use consumption plus per-account and per-IP rate limits on code issuance and redemption, which shrinks the window in which a leaked code can be replayed against another flow but does not remove the underlying purpose-confusion bug. As a detective control, alert on redemption of a code by a workflow different from the one that requested it, and on rapid sequences of code issuance followed by sensitive profile or password changes; these logs help contain an exploit already in progress but are not preventive. Do not rely on WAF rules or generic 'defense in depth' measures, since the abuse is semantically valid application traffic; until 2.0.3 is deployed, treat any email-code-based account change as untrusted and require out-of-band confirmation.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affected Packages
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
Apache Answer is a self-hosted Q&A/knowledge-platform application that relies on emailed verification codes to gate several distinct security-relevant workflows - for example account registration/verification, password or email change, and other identity-confirming actions. The correct design binds each issued code to the specific purpose and subject it was generated for, validating that binding server-side when the code is redeemed. In affected releases through 2.0.2, that purpose check is missing or insufficient, so a code minted by one email workflow is treated as valid input by another; this is a classic verification-token purpose-confusion / cross-workflow token reuse flaw. No CWE identifier was assigned in the supplied data, and no CPE strings were provided; the root-cause class maps most closely to improper authentication/authorization of a credential artifact (CWE-287/CWE-863 class) rather than to memory-safety or injection. The assessed vector's AC:H and the absence of any non-default configuration prerequisite indicate the attacker must actually acquire a live code (e.g., through an account they control, an intercepted or leaked email, or timing-dependent reuse) and then replay it against a victim's sensitive workflow - the weakness amplifies an existing code-theft or code-leak primitive into full account takeover rather than providing a standalone single-request compromise. Note: authentication requirements are not confirmed by the vendor advisory itself; however, the assessed vector carries PR:N, indicating no prior authenticated session is required.
Know when the next one hits your stack
- 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
AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Network-reachable workflow (AV:N); AC:H because the attacker must obtain and reuse a valid code across workflows; PR:N as no prior authentication is needed; account takeover yields C:H/I:H, no availability impact.
Primary rating from Vendor (CNA).
CVSS VectorVendor
Lifecycle Timeline
1Description PRE-NVD
Threat Intelligence Overview
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.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
Authentication bypass attacks exploit flaws in the verification mechanisms that control access to systems and applications.
EUVD-2026-104156
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Exploit-DB