PostyBirb Plus Submission Description Editor DescriptionInput.tsx cross site scripting
Affects PostyBirb Plus v3.1.75 (official release) when an imported FurAffinity archive directory is opened in the submission edit page. CVSS scores it 5.1 (medium). Fixed in 3.1.76.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- Published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 13/100 · provisional
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Specific setups only
- Fix
- Fixed in 3.1.76
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
PostyBirb Plus, a desktop application for posting content to art and social sites, is affected through its submission description editor, where a flaw allows cross-site scripting that can be triggered remotely. An attacker could use this to run malicious scripts in the context of the application's interface, potentially compromising user sessions or data.
Read the original description
A security flaw has been discovered in PostyBirb Plus up to 3.1.75. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file ui/src/views/submissions/submission-forms/form-components/DescriptionInput.tsx of the component Submission Description Editor. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. Upgrading to version 3.1.76 addresses this issue. The patch is identified as 6b11c2345ad98ae59fd5404a9f1024eb1d10c8a4. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.
What to do
Check whether your setup matches what the bug needs.
Victim imports an attacker-supplied archive directory through the app's Import directory feature and opens the imported submission's edit page Affected product is PostyBirb Plus, official release v3.1.75 (the report's tested version)Upgrade to a fixed version: 3.1.76.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- n/a PostyBirb Plus
3.1.0, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.5, 3.1.6, 3.1.7, 3.1.8, 3.1.9, 3.1.10, 3.1.11, 3.1.12, 3.1.13, 3.1.14, 3.1.15, 3.1.16, 3.1.17, 3.1.18, 3.1.19, 3.1.20, 3.1.21, 3.1.22, 3.1.23, 3.1.24, 3.1.25, 3.1.26, 3.1.27, 3.1.28, 3.1.29, and 46 more
Evidence 9
- Advisory
- Advisory
- Advisory
- Advisory
- Patch
- Patch
- Patch
- Exploit
- Report
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-120190
What does this mean?
The Submission Description Editor does not safely handle script content in imported submission data, so a script can run in the app's privileged Electron renderer. That script can read the AUTH_ID API token, stored site credentials, and account partition cookies.Source: objects.githubusercontent.com, github.com
Am I affected, and how do I check?
The report tested PostyBirb Plus official release v3.1.75. The issue requires importing an attacker-supplied FurAffinity archive dump directory through the app's Import directory feature and then opening the imported submission's edit page. Compare the installed version against v3.1.75 and check whether the Import directory feature has been used with such a directory.Source: objects.githubusercontent.com, github.com
What should I do about it?
Upgrade PostyBirb Plus to v3.1.76, the release the advisory lists as fixed.Source: objects.githubusercontent.com, github.com
Is it being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data