CVE-2026-29106 — SuiteCRM has blind XSS in return_id parameter

SuiteCRM is an open-source, enterprise-ready Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software application. Prior to versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3, the value of the return_id request parameter is copied into the value of an HTML tag attribute which is an event handler and is encapsulated in double quotation marks. Versions 7.15.1 and 8.9.3 patch the issue. Users should also use a Content Security Policy (CSP) header to completely mitigate XSS.

Published Mar 19, 2026Updated Mar 20, 2026Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M

Triage

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

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

suitecrm

CVSS base

5.9

MEDIUM

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

suitecrm

Products (1)

suitecrm

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
5.9	CVSS 3.1	MEDIUM	—	—	cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-79
CWE-80
CWE-116
CWE-159

References

2 on the record

github.com/SuiteCRM/SuiteCRM/security/advisories/GHSA-7qrj-5hj6-7c2m
x_refsource_CONFIRM
docs.suitecrm.com/admin/releases/7.15.x
x_refsource_MISC

Elsewhere on this site

suitecrmevery CVE for this vendor
CWE-79other 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.