GHSA-wr57-hqmp-fgvh CVE-2026-69197
Umbraco: Delivery API leaks protected (Public Access) content through Content Picker / Multi-Node Tree Picker expansion
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.66%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 51.69% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
- CWE-862 Missing Authorization
- Fix
13.15.1- Upgrade Umbraco.Cms to this version or later
Description
The Content Delivery API enforces member / Public Access protection only at the controller layer, against the node that is directly requested. When a public (unprotected) node references a protected node through a Content Picker or Multi-Node Tree Picker (including those nested inside Block List, Block Grid, or Rich Text Editor blocks), the Delivery API expands and serializes the protected node with no access check applied.
Similarly, configuration based restrictions based on aliases of allowed or disallowed content types are by-passed for referenced content items that are retrieved via property expansion.
As a result, an anonymous / unauthorized caller can retrieve a protected node's:
- Name, route, and id — always, even without expansion, and
- Full property values — when the request uses ?expand on the picker property. A direct request for the same protected node correctly returns 401 Unauthorized, which makes the leak easy to miss: the protection appears to work, but is bypassed via reference expansion.
Impact
Confidential, member-gated content (e.g. pricing, internal documents, gated articles) referenced by any publicly readable node is disclosed to unauthenticated clients. No write/integrity or availability impact.
Highest impact when the Delivery API is publicly readable (DeliveryApi:PublicAccess: true). Still exploitable, at reduced severity, when the Delivery API is gated by the org-wide API key (the key holder still bypasses per-node Public Access).
Patches
13.15.1, 17.5.3, 18.0.2
References
https://docs.umbraco.com/umbraco-cms/develop-with-umbraco/headless-and-apis/content-delivery-api
Affected versions
NuGet
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| Umbraco.Cms | >= 12.0.0, < 13.15.1 |
13.15.1 |
| Umbraco.Cms | >= 14.0.0-rc1, < 17.5.3 |
17.5.3 |
| Umbraco.Cms | >= 18.0.0, < 18.0.2 |
18.0.2 |
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.
Umbraco.Cms NuGet → 13.15.1
- dotnet
dotnet add package Umbraco.Cms --version 13.15.1
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- 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-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area. Ensure that appropriate compartmentalization is built into the system design, and the compartmentalization allows for and reinforces privilege separation functionality. Architects and designers should rely on the principle of least privilege to decide the appropriate time to use privileges and the time to drop privileges.
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
Packages
Other links
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/security/advisories/GHSA-wr57-hqmp-fgvh
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/commit/26312a3f717a0f33bb3d7d28b14bef3592bdb0fe
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/commit/5360e2a9681ce2d0024be374e80339260bcc2511
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/commit/a9649da4e5a0786db7688bd6b5036a21df26b015
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/releases/tag/release-13.15.1
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/releases/tag/release-17.5.3
- github.com/umbraco/Umbraco-CMS/releases/tag/release-18.0.2
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-vr9v-27gg-qgx4 Umbraco.Cms: XSS/HTML Injection in Umbraco Backoffice confirmation dialog | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-2qjj-h6wp-c7h7 Umbraco.Cms: Open Redirect Vulnerability in Surface Controllers | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-rhcg-3h8r-v6vp Umbraco Affected by Vertical Privilege Escalation via Missing Authorization Checks | High | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-vrqc-59mw-qqg7 Umbraco has Stored XSS in UFM Rendering Pipeline via Permissive DOMPurify Attribute Filtering | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-fpvf-fvp5-996r Umbraco Backoffice API Allows Unauthorized Modification of Domain Data | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-54mj-vcvj-q3v5 Umbraco CMS has an arbitrary file upload vulnerability | Critical | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-hfv2-pf68-m33x Umbraco Vulnerable to Improper File Access and Credential Exposure in Dictionary Import Functionality | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
| GHSA-pgvc-6h2p-q4f6 Umbraco CMS disclosure of configured password requirements | Medium | Also affects Umbraco.Cms |
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