Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-48505 is a high-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 22th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and IA-11 (Re-authentication) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-38392
Vulnerability Data
Filament is a collection of full-stack components for accelerated Laravel development. From 4.0.0 until 4.11.5 and 5.6.5, a flaw in the handling of recovery codes for app-based multi-factor authentication allows the same recovery code to be reused via concurrent submission.…
more
This issue does not affect email-based MFA. It also only applies when recovery codes are enabled. If an attacker gains access to both the user's password and their recovery codes, they get two authenticated sessions per recovery code burned instead of one, or more if they batch the parallel submissions wider, materially extending the attacker's window of access compared to what the single-use guarantee implies. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.11.5 and 5.6.5.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement can require each successive workflow step to present the proper authorization context before proceeding.
Re-authentication requirements can be placed at critical workflow steps to ensure the actor has performed prior behaviors.
Maintaining separate execution domains for each process structurally eliminates unintended concurrent access to the same shared resources.
Preventing unintended information transfer through shared system resources directly addresses the improper concurrent modification that defines a race condition.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
Enforcing authorization policies can include sequence constraints on multi-step actions.
Hardened configuration baselines can embed required workflow ordering rules.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.
Change management reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.