VulnerabilityPublished 4 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-27803: dani-garcia vaultwarden · Improper Privilege Management

Affects dani-garcia vaultwardenSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.3 High : upgrade to 1.35.4 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.3High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 23% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.35.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: 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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 4 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 vaultwarden and dani-garcia/vaultwarden to 1.35.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
dani-garciavaultwarden	Affected <1.35.4	Fixed in 1.35.4
GitHubdani-garcia/vaultwarden`pkg:github/dani-garcia/vaultwarden`Other threats	Affected <1.35.4	Fixed in 1.35.4

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

AI-suggested

Immediately upgrade all Vaultwarden instances to version 1.35.4 or later to apply the official patch that enforces proper privilege checks.
Conduct a thorough audit of user roles and permissions, especially focusing on Manager roles with manage=false flags, to ensure no unauthorized privileges exist.
Implement network segmentation and access controls to restrict Vaultwarden server access only to trusted users and networks.
Enable and review detailed logging and monitoring of management operations within Vaultwarden to detect suspicious privilege escalations or unauthorized actions.
Educate administrators and users on the importance of least privilege principles and regularly review access rights.
Consider additional multi-factor authentication (MFA) for Vaultwarden access to reduce risk from compromised credentials.
Regularly back up Vaultwarden data securely to enable recovery in case of data tampering or deletion.
Stay informed on Vaultwarden security advisories and promptly apply future updates.

Description

Vaultwarden is an unofficial Bitwarden compatible server written in Rust, formerly known as bitwarden_rs. Prior to version 1.35.4, when a Manager has manage=false for a given collection, they can still perform several management operations as long as they have access to the collection. This issue has been patched in version 1.35.4.

Impact

The vulnerability allows unauthorized privilege escalation within Vaultwarden, enabling attackers with limited Manager privileges to perform unauthorized management operations on password collections. This can lead to unauthorized access, modification, or deletion of sensitive credentials stored in Vaultwarden, compromising the confidentiality and integrity of critical authentication data. Organizations using vulnerable versions risk credential theft, lateral movement, and potential full compromise of systems relying on these credentials. The availability impact is low but possible if attackers delete or corrupt collections. Since Vaultwarden is used worldwide by organizations and individuals seeking a self-hosted password management solution, the scope is broad. Exploitation requires only low privilege and network access, increasing the risk of insider threats or compromised accounts escalating their privileges. The breach of password data can have cascading effects, including unauthorized access to corporate resources, cloud services, and personal accounts.

Summary

CVE-2026-27803 is a vulnerability in Vaultwarden, an unofficial Rust-based Bitwarden-compatible password manager server, affecting versions prior to 1.35.4. The core issue is improper privilege management (CWE-269), where users assigned the Manager role with the manage=false flag on a collection can still perform multiple management operations on that collection. This bypass occurs because the system fails to enforce the manage=false restriction correctly, allowing unauthorized privilege escalation within the application. The vulnerability also relates to CWE-863 (Incorrect Authorization) and CWE-285 (Improper Authorization), indicating systemic authorization logic flaws. Exploitation requires network access and a user with Manager-level privileges but does not require user interaction, making it easier to exploit in targeted environments. The impact includes unauthorized disclosure and modification of sensitive password data, undermining confidentiality and integrity. The vulnerability was publicly disclosed and assigned a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.3 (high severity), reflecting its potential impact and ease of exploitation. The issue was fixed in Vaultwarden version 1.35.4 by properly enforcing the manage=false flag and correcting authorization checks. No public exploits have been reported yet, but the vulnerability poses a significant risk to organizations relying on Vaultwarden for password management.

CWE-269Improper Privilege Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that 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
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.
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)
Secure Design Principles (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
Restful Privilege Elevation (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Abuse (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Escalation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
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).
CWE-285Improper Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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 you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/dani-garcia/vaultwarden/security/advisories/GHSA-h4hq-rgvh-wh27 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Mar 2026, 22:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-269, CWE-863, CWE-285

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats