CVE-2026-77567: Filament: recovery codes bypass app-based MFA
HIGHFilament, a Laravel admin-panel toolkit sometimes used to build back-office consoles for AI/ML platforms, shipped a challenge-form bug where required-field handling was broken, letting an attacker skip the app-based (TOTP) MFA factor whenever recovery codes are enabled on the account — email-based MFA is unaffected. This is a network-exploitable, low-complexity flaw (CVSS 8.1, AC:L, UI:N) that only needs low-privileged, already-valid credentials (PR:L), which is exactly the scenario where MFA is supposed to be the last line of defense. There's no EPSS score, no CISA KEV listing, no public PoC, and no Nuclei template yet, so opportunistic mass exploitation looks unlikely today, but the low bar to trigger it (form manipulation, no AI/ML-specific tradecraft) means it's trivial once an attacker has any foothold. If any Laravel/Filament admin panel in your stack fronts model management, dataset, or vector-store administration, treat this as an access-control gap on that control plane. Action: upgrade to Filament 4.12.0 or 5.7.0 immediately, audit which admin accounts have recovery codes enabled, and review auth logs for MFA-challenge anomalies until patched.
What is the risk?
High CVSS (8.1) driven by confidentiality and integrity impact with no user interaction required, but real-world exploitability is bounded by two preconditions: the attacker must already hold valid low-privileged credentials, and the target account must have app-based MFA with recovery codes enabled. No EPSS percentile, no CISA KEV entry, no public exploit code, and no Nuclei template exist, indicating this is not yet under active or scripted exploitation. The practical risk is post-compromise privilege consolidation: an attacker with stolen or weak credentials can strip out the second factor that would otherwise have stopped them, converting a partial compromise into full authenticated admin access.
How does the attack unfold?
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
1 step-
Upgrade Filament to 4.12.0 (v4 line) or 5.7.0 (v5 line) immediately — the fix is in commit 45534a6f. As a stopgap if patching is delayed, disable recovery-code-based MFA recovery or switch affected accounts to email-based MFA, which is confirmed unaffected. Audit admin/back-office accounts to identify which have app-based MFA with recovery codes enabled, force re-enrollment post-patch, and review authentication logs for logins that reached the MFA challenge screen but completed without a valid TOTP submission.
How is it classified?
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
This CVE is relevant to:
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-77567?
Filament, a Laravel admin-panel toolkit sometimes used to build back-office consoles for AI/ML platforms, shipped a challenge-form bug where required-field handling was broken, letting an attacker skip the app-based (TOTP) MFA factor whenever recovery codes are enabled on the account — email-based MFA is unaffected. This is a network-exploitable, low-complexity flaw (CVSS 8.1, AC:L, UI:N) that only needs low-privileged, already-valid credentials (PR:L), which is exactly the scenario where MFA is supposed to be the last line of defense. There's no EPSS score, no CISA KEV listing, no public PoC, and no Nuclei template yet, so opportunistic mass exploitation looks unlikely today, but the low bar to trigger it (form manipulation, no AI/ML-specific tradecraft) means it's trivial once an attacker has any foothold. If any Laravel/Filament admin panel in your stack fronts model management, dataset, or vector-store administration, treat this as an access-control gap on that control plane. Action: upgrade to Filament 4.12.0 or 5.7.0 immediately, audit which admin accounts have recovery codes enabled, and review auth logs for MFA-challenge anomalies until patched.
Is CVE-2026-77567 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-77567 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2026-77567?
Upgrade Filament to 4.12.0 (v4 line) or 5.7.0 (v5 line) immediately — the fix is in commit 45534a6f. As a stopgap if patching is delayed, disable recovery-code-based MFA recovery or switch affected accounts to email-based MFA, which is confirmed unaffected. Audit admin/back-office accounts to identify which have app-based MFA with recovery codes enabled, force re-enrollment post-patch, and review authentication logs for logins that reached the MFA challenge screen but completed without a valid TOTP submission.
What systems are affected by CVE-2026-77567?
This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: MLOps/admin control planes built on Laravel, Model management dashboards.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-77567?
CVE-2026-77567 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (HIGH).
What is the AI security impact?
Affected AI Architectures
Compliance Controls Affected
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
Filament is a collection of full-stack components for accelerated Laravel development. Prior to versions 4.12.0 and 5.7.0, incorrect challenge-form required-field handling allows app-based multi-factor authentication to be bypassed when recovery codes are enabled. Email-based multi-factor authentication is not affected. This issue is fixed in versions 4.12.0 and 5.7.0.
Exploitation Scenario
An attacker obtains valid but low-privileged credentials for a Laravel application's Filament-based admin panel — for example via credential stuffing, a phishing kit, or leaked secrets found in CI/CD logs of an internal MLOps tool. On login, the attacker is presented with the app-based MFA challenge; because the challenge form mishandles a required field when recovery codes are enabled, the attacker manipulates the submitted form (e.g., omitting or malforming the TOTP field) to pass the challenge without a valid one-time code. This grants full authenticated access to the panel, which — if it happens to be the admin console for a model registry, RAG pipeline, or vector database — hands the attacker control over AI system configuration and data without ever needing to defeat the actual second factor.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-287 — Improper Authentication: When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
- [Architecture and Design] Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N References
Timeline
Related Vulnerabilities
CVE-2026-21858 10.0 n8n: Input Validation flaw enables exploitation
Same attack type: Auth Bypass GHSA-vvpj-8cmc-gx39 10.0 picklescan: security flaw enables exploitation
Same attack type: Auth Bypass CVE-2025-2828 10.0 LangChain RequestsToolkit: SSRF exposes cloud metadata
Same attack type: Auth Bypass CVE-2025-53767 10.0 Azure OpenAI: SSRF EoP, no auth required (CVSS 10)
Same attack type: Auth Bypass CVE-2026-26030 10.0 semantic-kernel: Code Injection enables RCE
Same attack type: Auth Bypass