VulnerabilityPublished 24 Feb 2026Updated 28 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-27128: craftcms cms · Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition

Affects craftcms cmsSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 5.8.23 or 4.16.19 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.8.23, 4.16.19

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: Present
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: High
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
Attack Requirements: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the Subsequent System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Feb 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

Upgrade craftcms cms to 5.8.23 or 4.16.19.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
craftcmscms	Affected >=5.0.0-RC1 <5.8.23	Fixed in 5.8.23
craftcmscms	Affected >=4.5.0-RC1 <4.16.19	Fixed in 4.16.19

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should promptly upgrade Craft CMS to versions 4.16.19 or 5.8.23 or later, where the vulnerability is patched with atomic token usage updates. Until patching is possible, administrators should enforce strict access controls to limit who can generate impersonation tokens and monitor for unusual concurrent access patterns indicative of race condition exploitation. Rate limiting and anomaly detection should be strengthened to prevent rapid concurrent requests using the same token. Additionally, reviewing and restricting the lifetime and scope of impersonation tokens can reduce exposure. Implementing application-layer concurrency controls or database transaction mechanisms to ensure atomic updates of token usage counts can mitigate race conditions. Regular audits of token usage logs and alerting on repeated token reuse attempts can help detect exploitation attempts early. Finally, educating developers and administrators about TOCTOU risks and secure token management practices is recommended.

Description

Craft is a content management system (CMS). In versions 4.5.0-RC1 through 4.16.18 and 5.0.0-RC1 through 5.8.22, a Time-of-Check-Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) race condition exists in Craft CMS’s token validation service for tokens that explicitly set a limited usage. The `getTokenRoute()` method reads a token’s usage count, checks if it’s within limits, then updates the database in separate non-atomic operations. By sending concurrent requests, an attacker can use a single-use impersonation token multiple times before the database update completes. To make this work, an attacker needs to obtain a valid user account impersonation URL with a non-expired token via some other means and exploit a race condition while bypassing any rate-limiting rules in place. For this to be a privilege escalation, the impersonation URL must include a token for a user account with more permissions than the current user. Versions 4.16.19 and 5.8.23 patch the issue.

Impact

This vulnerability can allow an attacker to reuse single-use impersonation tokens multiple times, leading to unauthorized privilege escalation within affected Craft CMS installations. Organizations using vulnerable versions may face risks of unauthorized access to sensitive administrative functions or user accounts with elevated permissions. This could result in data exposure, unauthorized content modifications, or disruption of CMS-managed services. The impact is particularly critical in environments where impersonation tokens are used for administrative or sensitive user operations. Although exploitation requires possession of a valid token and bypassing rate limiting, successful attacks could undermine trust in authentication mechanisms and lead to broader compromise of web applications relying on Craft CMS. Since the vulnerability affects token validation logic, it may also impact audit trails and session integrity. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially in targeted attacks.

CWE-367Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product checks the state of a resource before using that resource, but the resource's state can change between the check and the use in a way that invalidates the results of the check.
Implementation
The most basic advice for TOCTOU vulnerabilities is to not perform a check before the use. This does not resolve the underlying issue of the execution of a function on a resource whose state and identity cannot be assured, but it does help to limit the false sense of security given by the check.
Implementation
When the file being altered is owned by the current user and group, set the effective gid and uid to that of the current user and group when executing this statement.
Architecture and Design
Limit the interleaving of operations on files from multiple processes.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.11.3 (opens in a new tab)
V11.1.6 (opens in a new tab)
V1.11.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging Race Conditions via Symbolic Links (opens in a new tab)
Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Mar 2026, 18:46 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-367

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats