Patch Forecast
Yellow warning
Plan into this sprint.

CVE-2026-107568

Missing authorization in the Sieve notify action (6.2.22 through 6.3.6) and in the mail-rule Reply…

Risk score
42/100
CVSS
6.5 v3.1
Exploit chance (30 days)
0.2%
Published
19 Oct 2026

Open in the live forecast Today's forecast

What to know

What it is
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; …
Affected
See advisory
Fix
Apply the vendor's security update; see the linked advisory.
Exploitation
No known exploitation

Why it is Yellow

  • CVSS 6.5 medium

References

Original description

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'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'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's DKIM key, because it signs by the From header's domain, producing forged mail aligned to pass the domain's DMARC policy. The notify action and this behaviour were introduced in 6.2.22. In the mail-rule engine, a rule'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's or an account's rule reply from any address, signed, where that address is at a domain the server hosts with DKIM signing enabled, with that domain's key.

Last activity 19 Oct 2026. Patch Forecast updates every hour.