CWE-38
Path Traversal: '\absolute\pathname\here'
The product accepts input in the form of a backslash absolute path ('\absolute\pathname\here') without appropriate validation, which can allow an attacker to traverse the file system to unintended locations or access arbitrary files.
CVE-2026-9507 (GCVE-0-2026-9507)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-16 11:47 – Updated: 2026-06-16 16:18
VLAI
Title
Session fixation vulnerability in Enhancesoft's osTicket
Summary
A session fixation vulnerability has been identified in osTicket v1.18.2. This security flaw allows an attacker to hijack a victim’s account by keeping the initial session identifier (OSTSESSID) active after a successful login.
The issue lies in the fact that the application does not invalidate the pre-authentication cookie or generate a new identifier for the authenticated context. As a result, if an attacker manages to set a known session identifier in the victim’s browser, they will be able to maintain unauthorised access to the account once the victim has authenticated.
Severity
SSVC
Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
- CWE-38 - Path traversal: '\absolute\pathname\here'
Assigner
References
1 reference
| URL | Tags |
|---|---|
| https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/avis… | patch |
Impacted products
1 product
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancesoft | osTicket |
Affected:
1.18.2
|
Date Public
2026-06-16 11:44
Credits
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-9507",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-06-16T16:18:00.355878Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-16T16:18:10.713Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "osTicket",
"vendor": "Enhancesoft",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "1.18.2"
}
]
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "finder",
"value": "Mario Valiente"
}
],
"datePublic": "2026-06-16T11:44:00.000Z",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "A session fixation vulnerability has been identified in osTicket v1.18.2. This security flaw allows an attacker to hijack a victim\u2019s account by keeping the initial session identifier (OSTSESSID) active after a successful login.\n\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003cbr\u003eThe issue lies in the fact that the application does not invalidate the pre-authentication cookie or generate a new identifier for the authenticated context. As a result, if an attacker manages to set a known session identifier in the victim\u2019s browser, they will be able to maintain unauthorised access to the account once the victim has authenticated."
}
],
"value": "A session fixation vulnerability has been identified in osTicket v1.18.2. This security flaw allows an attacker to hijack a victim\u2019s account by keeping the initial session identifier (OSTSESSID) active after a successful login.\n\n\n\nThe issue lies in the fact that the application does not invalidate the pre-authentication cookie or generate a new identifier for the authenticated context. As a result, if an attacker manages to set a known session identifier in the victim\u2019s browser, they will be able to maintain unauthorised access to the account once the victim has authenticated."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 5.1,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "ACTIVE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-38",
"description": "CWE-38 Path traversal: \u0027\\absolute\\pathname\\here\u0027",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-16T11:50:42.928Z",
"orgId": "0cbda920-cd7f-484a-8e76-bf7f4b7f4516",
"shortName": "INCIBE"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"patch"
],
"url": "https://www.incibe.es/en/incibe-cert/notices/aviso/session-fixation-vulnerability-enhancesofts-osticket"
}
],
"solutions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "The current (legacy) source code is in maintenance mode, whilst Enhancesoft is focusing on a complete rewrite of the code (v2.0). This means that release cycles and security updates for the legacy code have been significantly delayed."
}
],
"value": "The current (legacy) source code is in maintenance mode, whilst Enhancesoft is focusing on a complete rewrite of the code (v2.0). This means that release cycles and security updates for the legacy code have been significantly delayed."
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "EXTERNAL"
},
"title": "Session fixation vulnerability in Enhancesoft\u0027s osTicket",
"x_generator": {
"engine": "Vulnogram 1.0.2"
}
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "0cbda920-cd7f-484a-8e76-bf7f4b7f4516",
"assignerShortName": "INCIBE",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-9507",
"datePublished": "2026-06-16T11:47:56.882Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-25T13:36:09.788Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-06-16T16:18:10.713Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
Mitigation ID: MIT-5.1
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
Description:
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434.
- Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the "../" string.
Mitigation ID: MIT-20
Phase: Implementation
Strategy: Input Validation
Description:
- 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.
No CAPEC attack patterns related to this CWE.