CVE-2026-93650

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".

A vulnerability was determined in Saleor up to 3.20.118/3.21.54/3.22.47/3.23.14. This vulnerability affects the function get_client_ip of the file saleor/account/throttling.py. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack can be executed remotely. The attack requires a high level of complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The projects own issue #19203 internal ticket admits "IP can be spoofed in most deployments" and that its REAL_IP_ENVIRON-type setting bypasses get_client_ip; fix (right-to-left RFC 7239 hop selection) proposed but still unmerged. The vendor explains within an email, that "[t]his is not a vulnerability, this is working at intended, Saleor expects XFF to be configured properly".