CVE-2026-85743freescout-help-desk freescout server-side request forgery
CVE-2026-85743 is a server-side request forgery in freescout-help-desk freescout, rated high (8.2 on CVSS 3.1).
Why this priority: High severity, with no exploitation signal yet.
Published · Updated · NVD status: Received
What it is
The server can be made to fetch an address of the attacker's choosing, including internal services and cloud metadata endpoints.
How it is reached
An attacker can exploit it over the network, with an administrator account, and nobody has to click anything.
What an attacker gains
A successful attack can read the data it protects. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker make the server send requests into internal networks or cloud metadata. The damage can spread past the vulnerable component into others.
Is it being exploited?
There is no public report of exploitation yet.
What to do
- Upgrade freescout-help-desk freescout to 1.8.230 or later.
- Until it is patched, review who holds accounts that can reach it.
Description from NVD
FreeScout is a self-hosted help desk and shared mailbox. Prior to 1.8.230, multiple outbound paths in Helper::downloadRemoteFile(), Helper::checkPort(), Helper::sanitizeRemoteUrl(), MailboxesController.php, and ModulesController.php do not consistently enforce a sink-level restricted-host policy. An authenticated administrator, or another authenticated user permitted to change mailbox connection settings or trigger module update or installation paths, can supply attacker-controlled URLs or hosts. The independent download and port-test sinks can reach encoded or otherwise uncovered loopback and internal addresses. The redirect-validation bypass additionally requires a configured whitelist that permits the original and final hosts while a restricted internal host appears only as an intermediate redirect hop. No unauthenticated SSRF path is established. The server can consequently contact loopback and internal services, provide a blind internal port oracle, and retrieve internal HTTP responses into application-controlled download sinks. This issue is fixed in version 1.8.230.
What this means for your architecture.
A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.
Components it touches
- Services that fetch URLs or call other hosts for a caller. The flaw sits between the application and the internal network behind it.
Trust boundaries in play
- Authenticated network access. An account is needed, so exposure follows who can sign in: customers, partners or staff.
- Isolation between components. The impact crosses out of the vulnerable component into others it should be isolated from.
- Between the application and the internal network behind it. An attacker who crosses it can make the server send requests into internal networks or cloud metadata.
Questions to answer about your own systems
- Where does freescout-help-desk freescout run in your systems, and at which version?
- Which of those instances can be reached from the internet or partner networks?
- What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?
Read more
Patches and commits
Sources
- CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
- Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
- Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
- Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.