CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2026-53648

CVE-2026-53648 — FOSSBilling: Downloadable product files can be overwritten through filename collisions

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. Prior to version 0.8.1, downloadable product files are stored using a deterministic filename-derived path. When an administrator uploads a file for a downloadable product, FOSSBilling stores the file as `md5(<original filename>)` under the uploads directory. Because the stored path depends only on the client-supplied filename, two different downloadable products, or product/order files, uploaded with the same original filename will resolve to the same stored file path. A later upload can overwrite an earlier upload, causing customers or administrators downloading the earlier product to receive the later file instead. Version 0.8.1 patches the issue. Some workarounds are available. Restrict the `servicedownloadable.manage` permission to fully trusted administrators only. As an operational mitigation, ensure…

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

fossbilling

fossbilling

CVSS base

5.1

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)

fossbilling

Products (1)

fossbilling

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
5.1CVSS 4.0MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-73
  • CWE-668

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

  • T1562.003Impair Defenses: Impair Command History Logging
  • T1574.006Hijack Execution Flow: Dynamic Linker Hijacking
  • T1574.007Hijack Execution Flow: Path Interception by PATH Environment Variable

Detection

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

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /order.

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

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.