CVE Intelligence
Medium CSRF

CVE-2026-22800 — PILOS affected by a CSRF via GET request allows unintentional termination of all active video conferences

PILOS (Platform for Interactive Live-Online Seminars) is a frontend for BigBlueButton. Prior to 4.10.0, Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in an administrative API endpoint responsible for terminating all active video conferences on a single server. The affected endpoint performs a destructive action but is exposed via an HTTP GET request. Although proper authorization checks are enforced and the endpoint cannot be triggered cross-site, the use of GET allows the action to be implicitly invoked through same-site content (e.g. embedded resources rendered within the application). As a result, an authenticated administrator who views crafted content within the application may unknowingly trigger the endpoint, causing all active video conferences on the server to be terminated without explicit intent or confirmation. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.10.0.

Published Jan 12, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
  • Technical severity (medium)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.15%
ahead of 4% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Thm
Pilos and 1 more
CVSS base
4.5
Medium · 3 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Thm Pilos, THM-Health PILOS).
  2. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  3. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (csrf), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Thm Pilos < 4.10.0 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
THM-Health PILOS version < 4.10.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
High
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
4.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 0.9 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
2.4 CVSS 3.1 Low 0.9 1.4 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
2.4 CVSS 3.1 Low — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 4.5 (NVD (NIST)) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.15%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · thm-health/pilos
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 4.5
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jan 12, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Thm
every CVE for this vendor
CSRF
same class
CWE-352
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2025-62781 PILOS is missing session regeneration after password change Oct 27, 2025
  • CVE-2025-62523 PILOS Misconfigured the Access-Control-Allow-Origin Header Oct 27, 2025
  • CVE-2025-62524 PILOS Exposes PHP version Oct 27, 2025

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 record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-22800 is "PILOS affected by a CSRF via GET request allows unintentional termination of all active video conferences", rated Medium. It affects Pilos (Thm); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 4.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.15% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.