Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-8135 is a high-severity Deserialization of Untrusted Data (CWE-502) vulnerability in Concretecms Concrete Cms. Its CVSS base score is 8.9 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 38th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-31336
Vulnerability Data
Concrete CMS 9.5.0 and below is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution due to insecure deserialization occurring in the ExpressEntryList block controller. An rogue administrator with privileges to add blocks to an area can bypass the intended protection mechanism (_fromCIF ===…
more
true), which normally restricts malicious inputs over form POST requests, by leveraging the REST API functionality. Because the REST API parses requests using json_decode(), the string "true" is evaluated as a strict PHP Boolean(true). This bypass allows the attacker to inject a malicious serialized payload into the block's filterFields database column. The payload will subsequently be executed when the block's data is viewed or edited by an administrator leading to complete server takeover (RCE).The Concrete CMS security team gave this vulnerability a CVSS v.4.0 score of 8.9 with a vector of CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H. Thanks Nguyễn Văn Thiện https://github.com/Thien225409 for reporting
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can uncover deserialization flaws before deployment.
Input validation directly stops deserialization of untrusted data by ensuring inputs are valid before processing.
Engineering principles such as safe deserialization and input sanitization structurally prevent the weakness from being introduced.
Integrity verification tools can detect malformed or tampered serialized data after the fact.
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.
PR.PS-02 addresses only post-deployment updates/patching and cannot prevent introduction of unsafe deserialization code, yet it can remediate some instances when the flaw exists in outdated libraries or components.
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 includes validation of deserialization routines and the use of untrusted data, reducing the likelihood that unsafe object reconstruction will be deployed.
Requiring vetted libraries, regular updates and SAST before release reduces the likelihood that deserialization logic will accept and act on attacker-controlled serialized objects.
Regular scanning of third-party libraries and timely patching reduce the likelihood that unsafe deserialization vulnerabilities remain active.
Mandatory malware scanning of data received over networks or storage media intercepts malicious serialized payloads before they are deserialized by the target application.