CVE-2026-72917
CVE-2026-72917 — AnythingLLM: Password recovery accepts one recovery code twice after whitespace normalization
AnythingLLM is an application that turns pieces of content into context that any LLM can use as references during chatting. From 1.0.0 to 1.15.0, AnythingLLM's unauthenticated account-recovery flow in server/utils/PasswordRecovery/index.js uses recoverAccount() to deduplicate the raw recoveryCodes values before trimming them, so one valid code submitted twice with different surrounding whitespace can satisfy the two-code check. Each normalized value can also match the same stored hash instead of consuming a distinct hash. An attacker who knows the target username and one recovery code can call POST /api/system/recover-account in multi-user mode, receive a password-reset token, and use POST /api/system/reset-password to take over the account, including an administrator account.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, Mintplex-Labs (CNA), GitHub, 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
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
5.9
medium
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade anything-llm to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mintplex-Labs | anything-llm | Affected versions >= 1.0.0, <= 1.15.0 | Vulnerable |
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Availability
None
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Scope
Unchanged
Attack Complexity
High
Attack Vector
Network
Privileges Req
None
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.9 | CVSS 3.1 | medium | 2.2 | 3.6 | GitHub (CNA), Mintplex-Labs (CNA) |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
CWE-180 · Incorrect Behavior Order: Validate Before Canonicalize
- Bypass Protection Mechanism::
Mitigation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.::
CWE-287 · Improper Authentication
- Read Application Data
- Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
- Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Mitigation: Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.::
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-180
- CWE-287Improper Authentication
Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.
- T1027Obfuscated Files or Information
- T1548Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism
- T1040Network Sniffing
Public exploit
Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.
Repositories
1
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 /utils/PasswordRecovery/index.js, /api/system/recover-account, /api/system/reset-password.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable anything-llm.
- Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 public PoC repositories were reported.
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 5.9 (AV:N)
Aug 10, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Aug 10, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by mitre
Aug 10, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
Source activity
Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.
- 1×CVE modified by NIST, Modified, LinkAug 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
2 on the record
- github.com/Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm/commit/61766d06b77b903f66dc4afd8dffb3a39012db14
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
- github.com/Mintplex-Labs/anything-llm/security/advisories/GHSA-vv8w-wg6r-hq56
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre, NIST
Coverage
1 story from the feeds we poll
Elsewhere on this site
- Mintplex-Labsevery CVE for this vendor
- Remote Code Execsame class
- CWE-180other 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-2026-72917 is AnythingLLM: Password recovery accepts one recovery code twice after whitespace normalization, a medium vulnerability affecting anything-llm from Mintplex-Labs. 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-2026-72917. Public exploit evidence is: 1 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 5.9 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.