In MailEnable Enterprise Premium 10.23, the potential cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection mechanism was not implemented correctly…

published 2019-07-08 7y ago modified 2026-06-17 4mo ago also EUVD-2019-4500

cvss: 6.5; version 3.0, NVD
cisa kev: Not listed; not in CISA's catalog
epss: 0.6%; EPSS 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 47%
public exploits: 0; none known

In MailEnable Enterprise Premium 10.23, the potential cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protection mechanism was not implemented correctly and it was possible to bypass it by removing the anti-CSRF token parameter from the request. This could allow an attacker to manipulate a user into unwittingly performing actions within the application (such as sending email, adding contacts, or changing settings) on behalf of the attacker.

Patch / fix

fixed in 1

mailenable mailenable 6.90, 7.62, 8.64, 9.83, 10.24

Is CVE-2019-12923 in your stack? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.

Check with Fencer

Exploit prediction

0.57% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 47% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-09).

CVSS scores

assigned by	version	score	vector
NVD	3.0	6.5	CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
NVD	2.0	4.3	AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N

Classification

Weakness

CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery

References

mailenable.com /Premium-ReleaseNotes.txt
release-notes, vendor-advisory
nccgroup.trust /uk/our-research/technical-advisory-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-mailenable/
release-notes, third-party-advisory

Sources

CVE List CVE-2019-12923
NVD CVE-2019-12923

Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.