VulnerabilityPublished 5 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-27723: opf openproject · Improper Access Control

Affects opf openprojectSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 17.1.2 or 17.0.5 when convenient.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 17.1.2, 17.0.5

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

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

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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 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

Upgrade openproject and opf/openproject to 17.1.2 or 17.0.5.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
opfopenproject	Affected <17.1.2	Fixed in 17.1.2
opfopenproject	Affected <17.0.5	Fixed in 17.0.5
GitHubopf/openproject`pkg:github/opf/openproject`Other threats	Affected <17.0.5 <17.1.2	Fixed in 17.0.5 17.1.2

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-27723, organizations should immediately upgrade OpenProject to versions 17.0.5 or 17.1.2 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. In addition to patching, administrators should audit user permissions and project access controls to ensure that users have the minimum necessary privileges. Implement strict role-based access control (RBAC) policies and regularly review project membership and permissions to prevent privilege escalation opportunities. Monitoring and logging wiki page creation activities can help detect unauthorized attempts to create content in unpermitted projects. Employ network segmentation and access restrictions to limit exposure of OpenProject instances to trusted users only. For environments where immediate patching is not feasible, consider temporary compensating controls such as disabling wiki page creation for lower-privileged users or restricting access to sensitive projects. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to address potential misuse of the vulnerability and educate users about the importance of reporting suspicious activities.

Description

OpenProject is an open-source, web-based project management software. Prior to versions 17.0.5 and 17.1.2, an attacker can create wiki pages belonging to unpermitted projects through an improperly authenticated request. This issue has been patched in versions 17.0.5 and 17.1.2.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-27723 is on the integrity of project data within OpenProject environments. Unauthorized creation of wiki pages in unpermitted projects can lead to misinformation, unauthorized content injection, and potential disruption of project workflows. While confidentiality and availability remain unaffected, the integrity compromise could undermine trust in project documentation and collaboration. For organizations relying heavily on OpenProject for managing sensitive or critical projects, this vulnerability could facilitate insider threats or lateral movement by malicious actors with limited privileges. The risk is heightened in large organizations with multiple projects and complex access controls, where unauthorized content could go unnoticed and cause operational confusion or reputational damage. However, the requirement for authenticated access limits exposure to external unauthenticated attackers. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for future exploitation.

CWE-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (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 12 Mar 2026, 20:28 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats