VulnerabilityPublished 1 Jun 2026

CVE-2026-45264: nextcloud security-advisories · Improper Access Control

Affects nextcloud security-advisoriesSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium · fixed in 21.0.4 : update nextcloud security-advisories 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 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 21.0.4, 20.1.11, 19.1.16 +2

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 1 Jun 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 to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
nextcloudsecurity-advisories	Affected >=21.0.0 <21.0.4	Fixed in 21.0.4
nextcloudsecurity-advisories	Affected >=20.0.0 <20.1.11	Fixed in 20.1.11
nextcloudsecurity-advisories	Affected >=19.0.0 <19.1.16	Fixed in 19.1.16
nextcloudsecurity-advisories	Affected >=18.0.0 <18.1.12	Fixed in 18.1.12
nextcloudsecurity-advisories	Affected >=17.0.0 <17.0.15	Fixed in 17.0.15
GitHubnextcloud/groupfolders`pkg:github/nextcloud/groupfolders`Other threats	Affected >=17.0.0 <17.0.15 >=18.0.0 <18.1.12 >=19.0.0 <19.1.16 >=20.0.0 <20.1.11 >=21.0.0 <21.0.4	Fixed in 17.0.15 18.1.12 19.1.16 20.1.11 21.0.4

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

AI-suggested

A fix is available and has been released in Nextcloud versions 17.0.15, 18.1.12, 19.1.16, 20.1.11, and 21.0.4. Users and administrators should upgrade affected Nextcloud instances to these or later versions to remediate the vulnerability. No additional mitigation steps are indicated by the vendor advisory.

Description

Nextcloud is an open source content collaboration platform. From versions 17.0.0 to before 17.0.15, 18.0.0 to before 18.1.12, 19.0.0 to before 19.1.16, 20.0.0 to before 20.1.11, and 21.0.0 to before 21.0.4, a user with READ and CREATE permission, but no UPDATE permission for a team folder can rename files in the team folder. This issue has been patched in versions 17.0.15, 18.1.12, 19.1.16, 20.1.11, and 21.0.4.

Impact

The vulnerability allows users with limited permissions (READ and CREATE but no UPDATE) to rename files in team folders, potentially leading to unauthorized modification of file metadata or organization. There is no impact on confidentiality or availability reported. The CVSS score of 4.3 (medium severity) reflects the limited scope of impact, primarily an integrity concern without elevation of privileges beyond the user's existing access level.

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 1 Jun 2026, 17:20 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats