Invoice Ninja < 5.13.28 Broken Access Control via Vendor Portal
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in 5.13.28
- Who is exposed
- Specific setups only
Do first: Check whether your setup matches what the bug needs. Affects Invoice Ninja before 5.13.28 Attacker must be an authenticated vendor-portal contact Document identifiers are predictable because HASH_SALT is empty by default
- Exploitation?/40Exploitation: unknown (data gap). No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure8/25Specific setups only, reachable over the network
- Reach?/20Reach: unknown (data gap). No tracked technology or package matched
- Severity7.1/10CVSS 7.1
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 65 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 60 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 22 if CISA's SSVC rates it automatable
CVE-2026-82029 is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. No public exploit code is tracked. It is rated CVSS 7.1 (high) and affects invoiceninja; fixed in 5.13.28.
- 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- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean?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? →
- 15/100 · 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 5.13.28
- 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
Invoice Ninja's vendor portal has a broken access control flaw that lets a remote attacker with a low-privilege login read invoice PDFs, contracts, payment receipts, and expense attachments belonging to other vendors and clients in the same company. The attacker reaches these files by guessing predictable sequential document identifiers in the document download requests.
Read the original description
Invoice Ninja before 5.13.28 contains a broken access control vulnerability that allows authenticated vendor-portal contacts to access documents belonging to other vendors and clients by exploiting authorization checks that validate only company_id scope instead of vendor ownership. Attackers can request GET /vendor/documents/{hashid}/download or POST /vendor/documents/download_multiple, enumerating predictable sequential Hashids document identifiers due to a default empty HASH_SALT, to read any invoice PDFs, contracts, payment receipts, and expense attachments within the company.
What to do
Check whether your setup matches what the bug needs.
Affects Invoice Ninja before 5.13.28 Attacker must be an authenticated vendor-portal contact Document identifiers are predictable because HASH_SALT is empty by defaultUpgrade to a fixed version: 5.13.28.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- invoiceninja invoiceninja
fixed in 5.13.28
Evidence 3
- Patch
- Repository
- Link
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-82029
Is CVE-2026-82029 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
What does this mean?
Authenticated vendor-portal contacts can read documents that belong to other vendors and clients of the same company, including invoice PDFs, contracts, payment receipts, and expense attachments. The flaw is a broken access control check on document access.Source: vulncheck.com
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-82029?
invoiceninja: before 5.13.28.Source: cve.now feed data
Am I affected, and how do I check?
Invoice Ninja versions before 5.13.28 are affected. The vulnerable setup involves the vendor portal, and document identifiers are predictable when HASH_SALT is left empty, which is the default. To check, look at the installed version and whether HASH_SALT is set in the environment configuration.Source: vulncheck.com
How do I fix CVE-2026-82029?
Upgrade Invoice Ninja to version 5.13.28 or later, which contains the fix.Source: vulncheck.com