Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-16049. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-16049 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, database audit logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-16049 using CVSS 4.3, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

Workarounds are not confirmed from current sources. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

mediumInjectionpublic exploit

CVE-2026-16049

CVE-2026-16049 — _GitLab Plugin allows cross-channel post injection and phishing via missing channel permission checks in issue API endpoints_

Q: What is CVE-2026-16049?

CVE-2026-16049 is _GitLab Plugin allows cross-channel post injection and phishing via missing channel permission checks in issue API endpoints_. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Injection mapped to CWE-862 CWE-862.

Mattermost Plugins versions <=11.8 10.20.11 11.5.7.0 _The Mattermost GitLab plugin fails to verify channel permissions when processing API requests with a caller-supplied_ {{post_id}}_, and fails to validate the_ {{web_url}} _parameter against the configured GitLab instance, which allows an authenticated attacker to inject bot-authored messages containing arbitrary URLs into channels they do not have access to via the_ {{createIssue}} _and_ {{attachCommentToIssue}} _API endpoints._ Mattermost Advisory ID: MMSA-2026-00673

Published Aug 17, 2026Updated Aug 17, 2026Sources: NVD, Mattermost (CNA), GitHub, GitHub Security Advisory, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

Mattermost

5 products listed

CVSS base

4.3

medium · 2 sources

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Update Mattermost Plugins to versions 11.9.0, 10.11.21, 11.7.6 or higher.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
Mattermost	Mattermost	0 to <= 10.20.11	Vulnerable
Mattermost	Mattermost	0 to <= 11.5.7	Vulnerable
Mattermost	Mattermost	11.9.0	Patched
Mattermost	Mattermost	10.11.21	Patched
Mattermost	Mattermost	11.7.6	Patched

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

None

Confidentiality

Low

Integrity

None

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
4.3	CVSS 3.1	medium	2.8	1.4	mattermost.com (CNA), GHSA
3.9	CVSS 3.1	low	—	—	Mattermost (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-862 · Missing Authorization

Read Application Data
Read Files or Directories
Modify Application Data
Modify Files or Directories

Mitigation: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-862

Inferred from the weakness class — not observed against this CVE.

CAPEC-66 · SQL InjectionCAPEC-7 · Blind SQL Injection

T1211Exploitation for Defensive Evasion
T1542.002Pre-OS Boot: Component Firmware
T1556Modify Authentication Process

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable Mattermost.
Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 2 public PoC repositories were reported.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSdatabase audit logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 4.3 (AV:N)
Aug 17, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Aug 17, 2026 · NVD
Added · GHSA-vr3j-2q9w-h26r published (medium)
Aug 17, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory

References

3 on the record

mattermost.com/security-updates
Vendor Advisory, Mitre
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-16049
NVD
github.com/advisories/GHSA-vr3j-2q9w-h26r
Exploit, Third Party Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

Mattermostevery CVE for this vendor
Injectionsame class
CWE-862other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-16049 is _GitLab Plugin allows cross-channel post injection and phishing via missing channel permission checks in issue API endpoints_, a medium vulnerability affecting Mattermost from Mattermost. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-16049. Public exploit evidence is: 2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 4.3 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.