VulnerabilityPublished 25 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-27705: makeplane plane · Insecure Direct Object Reference

Affects makeplane planeSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.9 Medium : upgrade to 1.2.2 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 16% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.2.2

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

Base metrics

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

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: Unreported

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: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
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.
Exploit Maturity: Unreported: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · No knowledge of publicly available proof-of-concept · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 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 plane and makeplane/plane to 1.2.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
makeplaneplane	Affected <1.2.2	Fixed in 1.2.2
GitHubmakeplane/plane`pkg:github/makeplane/plane`Other threats	Affected <1.2.2	Fixed in 1.2.2

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should upgrade all Plane instances to version 1.2.2 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed by enforcing proper ownership verification during asset modification requests. Until upgrades are applied, administrators should restrict user authentication to trusted personnel only and monitor asset modification logs for suspicious activity, especially modifications originating from low-privilege accounts. Implement network segmentation and access controls to limit exposure of the Plane application to only necessary users. Additionally, consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block unusual asset modification attempts or enumeration of asset UUIDs. Regularly audit user roles and permissions to ensure minimal privilege principles are enforced. Finally, educate users about the risks of credential compromise and enforce strong authentication mechanisms to reduce the risk of unauthorized access.

Description

Plane is an an open-source project management tool. Prior to version 1.2.2, the `ProjectAssetEndpoint.patch()` method in `apps/api/plane/app/views/asset/v2.py` (lines 579–593) performs a global asset lookup using only the asset ID (`pk`) via `FileAsset.objects.get(id=pk)`, without verifying that the asset belongs to the workspace and project specified in the URL path. This allows any authenticated user (including those with the GUEST role) to modify the `attributes` and `is_uploaded` status of assets belonging to any workspace or project in the entire Plane instance by guessing or enumerating asset UUIDs. Version 1.2.2 fixes the issue.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is unauthorized modification of project assets across all workspaces and projects within a Plane instance. This can lead to data integrity issues, as malicious or unauthorized users can alter asset attributes or upload status, potentially corrupting project data or causing confusion among legitimate users. For organizations relying on Plane for project management, this could disrupt collaboration, delay project timelines, and erode trust in the platform's security controls. Although the vulnerability does not allow asset deletion or access to asset content directly, the ability to modify asset metadata can be leveraged for further attacks or social engineering. Since any authenticated user can exploit this, including those with minimal privileges, insider threats or compromised low-privilege accounts pose a significant risk. The vulnerability does not affect availability directly but can indirectly impact operational efficiency and data reliability.

CWE-639Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #24OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Architecture and Design
For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
Architecture and Design
Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V4.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (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 25 Feb 2026, 20:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats