VulnerabilityPublished 11 Mar 2026Updated 27 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-21359: Adobe Commerce · Incorrect Authorization

Affects Adobe CommerceSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.7 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.7Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
AdobeAdobe Commerce	Affected =0	Fixed in–
AdobeAdobe Commerce B2B	Affected =0	Fixed in–
AdobeMagento Open Source	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Adobe’s official security advisories and apply patches promptly once they become available for the affected Adobe Commerce versions.
Implement strict role-based access controls (RBAC) to minimize the permissions granted to users and services, reducing the impact of authorization bypass.
Conduct thorough code reviews and security testing focused on authorization logic to identify and remediate similar issues proactively.
Deploy web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious requests targeting authorization mechanisms.
Enable detailed logging and monitoring of authorization failures and unusual access patterns to detect potential exploitation attempts early.
Limit exposure of Adobe Commerce administrative interfaces to trusted networks or VPNs to reduce attack surface.
Educate development and operations teams about the risks of incorrect authorization and best practices for secure coding and configuration.
Consider implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) for administrative access to add an additional security layer. These measures, combined with timely patching, will help mitigate the risk posed by this vulnerability.

Description

Adobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha3, 2.4.8-p3, 2.4.7-p8, 2.4.6-p13, 2.4.5-p15, 2.4.4-p16 and earlier are affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and have limited impact to the integrity and availability of data. The exploit depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

Impact

The vulnerability could allow attackers to bypass security controls in Adobe Commerce, potentially leading to unauthorized actions that affect data integrity and availability. While the impact is limited and does not affect confidentiality, unauthorized modifications or disruptions could damage business operations, customer trust, and revenue streams. E-commerce platforms are critical infrastructure for many organizations, and even limited integrity or availability issues can cause significant operational and financial consequences. The lack of required privileges and user interaction increases the attack surface, making it easier for remote attackers to attempt exploitation. However, the high attack complexity and dependency on external conditions reduce the likelihood of widespread exploitation. Organizations running affected versions of Adobe Commerce are at risk of targeted attacks aiming to disrupt services or manipulate transactional data. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently limits immediate threat but does not eliminate future risk, especially as threat actors often develop exploits after public disclosure.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
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) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
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.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

helpx.adobe.com/security/products/magento/apsb26-05.html (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Mar 2026, 03:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats