CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2026-50188

CVE-2026-50188 — Kirby: Request header injection in `Http\Remote`

Kirby is an open-source content management system. Prior to 4.9.4 and 5.4.4, Kirby sites and plugins using the Kirby Http Remote class, including Remote::request(), Remote::get(), and Remote::post(), to send outgoing HTTP requests with untrusted data in the headers option could allow newline characters in a header value to inject a separate unintended request header to the remote service. This issue is fixed in versions 4.9.4 and 5.4.4.

Published Updated Sources: 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

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

getkirby

kirby

CVSS base

6.9

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

No

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)

getkirby

Products (1)

kirby

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
6.9CVSS 4.0MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-93
  • CWE-113

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

  • T1539Steal Web Session Cookie

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • getkirbyevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-93other 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.