Skip to content

GHSA-2xw4-v2wx-hqq9 CVE-2026-44176

Kirby CMS's `pages.access` permission is not checked during rendering of page drafts

Medium Packagist
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.36%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 30.29% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-862 Missing Authorization
Fix
4.9.1
Upgrade getkirby/cms to this version or later

Description

TL;DR

This vulnerability affects all Kirby sites where users of a particular role have no permission to access pages (pages.access permission is disabled). This can be due to configuration in the user blueprint(s), via options in the model blueprint(s) or via a combination of both settings.

Kirby sites are not affected if they intend all users of the site to be able to access all page drafts of the site. The vulnerability can only be exploited by authenticated users. Write actions are not affected by this vulnerability.


Introduction

Missing authorization allows authenticated users to perform actions they are not intended to have access to.

The effects of missing authorization can include unauthorized access to sensitive information as well as unauthorized changes to content or system information.

Affected components

Kirby's user permissions control which user role is allowed to perform specific actions to content models in the CMS. These permissions are defined for each role in the user blueprint (site/blueprints/users/...). It is also possible to customize the permissions for each target model in the model blueprints (such as in site/blueprints/pages/...) using the options feature. The permissions and options together control the authorization of user actions.

Kirby provides the pages.access and pages.list permissions (among others). The list permission controls whether affected models appear in lists throughout the Panel and REST API. The access permission has the same effect but also disables direct access to the affected models.

This vulnerability affects the path resolver for the main CMS router. The resolver takes an input path from the requested URL and determines which model (page or file) should be rendered. When a path is requested that points to a page draft, the resolver checks that the request either contains a valid preview token or is authenticated by a valid user.

Impact

In affected releases, Kirby allowed page drafts to be rendered if any valid user was authenticated, even if that user did not have access to the specific page model. Authenticated attackers with knowledge of the full path to an existing page draft could then access the rendered frontend page. This could lead to the disclosure of sensitive information, e.g. ahead of the launch of a new product or post.

Patches

The problem has been patched in Kirby 4.9.1 and Kirby 5.4.1. Please update to one of these or a later version to fix the vulnerability.

In all of the mentioned releases, Kirby has added a check that verifies that the requested page draft is accessible to the current user before rendering the draft template.

Credits

Kirby thank to @adrgs for responsibly reporting the identified issue.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
getkirby/cms
< 4.9.1
4.9.1
getkirby/cms
>= 5.0.0, < 5.4.1
5.4.1

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

getkirby/cms Packagist → 4.9.1

composer
composer require getkirby/cms:^4.9.1

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
None
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

Weakness

CWE-862: Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
  • Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
  • System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-9vx2-j98c-p72w
Kirby: Access to image files and limited access to JSON files outside of the site root via path traversal in the media handling
High Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-6j4c-mgqr-qv76
Kirby: Access to image files outside of the site root via path traversal in the media handling
Medium Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-67mx-6wf2-92xp
Kirby: File upload permissions are not checked during processing of chunk data
High Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-rf2p-vh74-7vvh
Kirby: System path exposure from error messages in the REST API
Medium Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-r3w8-2c5r-h9j9
Kirby: `pages.access` permission is not checked in the `site/find` REST API route
High Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-89cp-7p28-jffg
Kirby: Access to files of top-level drafts is not protected by permissions
Medium Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-whxw-24jc-cwmv
Kirby: External Initialization of the Panel on reverse proxy setups with the `Forwarded` header
Critical Also affects getkirby/cms
GHSA-wr9h-4r83-f4v6
Kirby: Cross-site scripting (XSS) from incomplete HTML/XML sanitization in `Dom::sanitize()`
High Also affects getkirby/cms
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor