VulnerabilityPublished 4 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-29069: craftcms cms · Insecure Direct Object Reference

Affects craftcms cmsSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 5.9.0-beta.2 or 4.17.0-beta.2 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.9.0-beta.2, 4.17.0-beta.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
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: 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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
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: 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 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 30 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 5.9.0-beta.2 or 4.17.0-beta.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
craftcmscms	Affected >=5.0.0-RC1 <5.9.0-beta.2	Fixed in 5.9.0-beta.2
craftcmscms	Affected >=4.0.0-RC1 <4.17.0-beta.2	Fixed in 4.17.0-beta.2
GitHubcraftcms/cms`pkg:github/craftcms/cms`Other threats	Affected =4.17.0-beta.2 =5.9.0-beta.2	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately upgrade Craft CMS to versions 5.9.0-beta.2 or later, or 4.17.0-beta.2 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until upgrades can be applied, administrators should restrict access to the actionSendActivationEmail() endpoint by implementing network-level controls such as IP whitelisting or web application firewall (WAF) rules to block unauthorized requests. Additionally, monitoring and alerting on unusual activation email requests or spikes in activation activity can help detect exploitation attempts. Review user registration and activation workflows to ensure email addresses are verified and that pending accounts cannot be activated without proper authorization. Implement rate limiting on activation email requests to reduce the risk of brute force or enumeration attacks on user IDs. Finally, educate users and administrators about the risk and encourage strong email security practices to prevent attackers from controlling target email accounts.

Description

Craft is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 5.9.0-beta.2 and 4.17.0-beta.2, the actionSendActivationEmail() endpoint is accessible to unauthenticated users and does not require a permission check for pending users. An attacker with no prior access can trigger activation emails for any pending user account by knowing or guessing the user ID. If the attacker controls the target user’s email address, they can activate the account and gain access to the system. This vulnerability is fixed in 5.9.0-beta.2 and 4.17.0-beta.2.

Impact

This vulnerability allows unauthenticated attackers to activate pending user accounts if they can guess user IDs and control the associated email addresses. The primary impact is unauthorized account activation and access, which can lead to unauthorized content management, data exposure, or further privilege escalation within the CMS environment. Organizations using vulnerable Craft CMS versions may face risks of account takeover, leading to potential website defacement, data leakage, or use of the CMS as a foothold for deeper network compromise. Since the vulnerability requires control over the target email address, the risk is somewhat mitigated but remains significant in environments where email addresses are predictable or attacker-controlled addresses are used during registration. The ease of exploitation (no authentication or user interaction required) and network accessibility of the endpoint increase the threat level. The vulnerability could disrupt the integrity and availability of CMS-managed websites and services, impacting business operations and reputation.

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 4 Mar 2026, 17:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats