https://db.gcve.eu Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Tue, 20 Oct 2026 16:32:41 +0000 https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-107568 <p>Missing authorization in the Sieve notify action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Reply action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to send mail through the server as any address. A Sieve notify sends a notification message, and its :from tag names the sender; the server set the notification&#39;s From header to that :from as the script wrote it, without checking that the address belongs to the account - the check that the Sieve vacation action applies to its own :from, and that the server applies to the sender of mail queued over COM or sent from the webmail. An account that can store a Sieve script (over ManageSieve, the REST API&#39;s self-service filter, or the administration interface) could therefore have the server send a notification from any address, on this server or anywhere; and where the claimed address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, the server signed the notification with that domain&#39;s DKIM key, because it signs by the From header&#39;s domain, producing forged mail aligned to pass the domain&#39;s DMARC policy. The notify action and this behaviour were introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a rule&#39;s Reply was likewise sent from whatever address the action named, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have a domain&#39;s or an account&#39;s rule reply fro…</p> <p>Missing authorization in the Sieve notify action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Reply action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to send mail through the server as any address. A Sieve notify sends a notification message, and its :from tag names the sender; the server set the notification&#39;s From header to that :from as the script wrote it, without checking that the address belongs to the account - the check that the Sieve vacation action applies to its own :from, and that the server applies to the sender of mail queued over COM or sent from the webmail. An account that can store a Sieve script (over ManageSieve, the REST API&#39;s self-service filter, or the administration interface) could therefore have the server send a notification from any address, on this server or anywhere; and where the claimed address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, the server signed the notification with that domain&#39;s DKIM key, because it signs by the From header&#39;s domain, producing forged mail aligned to pass the domain&#39;s DMARC policy. The notify action and this behaviour were introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a rule&#39;s Reply was likewise sent from whatever address the action named, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have a domain&#39;s or an account&#39;s rule reply fro…</p> https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-107568 https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-625v-xcvx-8hhv <p>Missing authorization in the Sieve notify action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Reply action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to send mail through the server as any address. A Sieve notify sends a notification message, and its :from tag names the sender; the server set the notification&#39;s From header to that :from as the script wrote it, without checking that the address belongs to the account - the check that the Sieve vacation action applies to its own :from, and that the server applies to the sender of mail queued over COM or sent from the webmail. An account that can store a Sieve script (over ManageSieve, the REST API&#39;s self-service filter, or the administration interface) could therefore have the server send a notification from any address, on this server or anywhere; and where the claimed address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, the server signed the notification with that domain&#39;s DKIM key, because it signs by the From header&#39;s domain, producing forged mail aligned to pass the domain&#39;s DMARC policy. The notify action and this behaviour were introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a rule&#39;s Reply was likewise sent from whatever address the action named, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have a domain&#39;s or an account&#39;s rule reply fro…</p> <p>Missing authorization in the Sieve notify action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Reply action (6.0.0 through 6.3.6) of Progressive Robot hMailServer allows an authenticated user to send mail through the server as any address. A Sieve notify sends a notification message, and its :from tag names the sender; the server set the notification&#39;s From header to that :from as the script wrote it, without checking that the address belongs to the account - the check that the Sieve vacation action applies to its own :from, and that the server applies to the sender of mail queued over COM or sent from the webmail. An account that can store a Sieve script (over ManageSieve, the REST API&#39;s self-service filter, or the administration interface) could therefore have the server send a notification from any address, on this server or anywhere; and where the claimed address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, the server signed the notification with that domain&#39;s DKIM key, because it signs by the From header&#39;s domain, producing forged mail aligned to pass the domain&#39;s DMARC policy. The notify action and this behaviour were introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a rule&#39;s Reply was likewise sent from whatever address the action named, whoever the rule belonged to, so that an account acting on its own rules over COM, a domain administrator, or an API key confined to a domain (over the REST API from 6.3.4) could have a domain&#39;s or an account&#39;s rule reply fro…</p> https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-625v-xcvx-8hhv