dbcve.org
Improper AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-285

CVE-2026-12673

MEDIUM · 5.9 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-06-20
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
65/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Liquidfiles versions before 4.2.12 are affected by a broken access control vulnerability resulting in privilege escalation from an Admin in a secondary domain to a Sysadmin by modifying a group in their managed secondary (non-default) group.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · moderate confidence

Broken access control vulnerability in Liquidfiles versions before 4.2.12 allows privilege escalation from an Admin user in a secondary (non-default) domain to Sysadmin by modifying a group in their managed secondary domain. The application fails to properly enforce access control boundaries between secondary domain admins and system-level administrator privileges.

MitigationUpgrade to Liquidfiles version 4.2.12 or later which contains the fix for this broken access control vulnerability.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
High
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if the system runs Liquidfiles
    Locate the Liquidfiles installation directory or check running services for Liquidfiles processes. Common paths include /opt/liquidfiles or /var/opt/liquidfiles. Check for the liquidfiles service/process running on the host.
    Affected if Liquidfiles is not installed or not running on the system.
  2. Determine the installed Liquidfiles version
    Run the command 'liquidfiles --version' or check the application's about/page in the web interface. Alternatively, inspect the version file in the installation directory if accessible.
    Affected if The installed version is before 4.2.12 (e.g., 4.2.10, 4.2.11, or earlier).
  3. Check if multiple domains are configured
    Log into the Liquidfiles web interface as a system administrator and navigate to the Domains or Multi-domain configuration section. Look for the presence of secondary (non-default) domains besides the primary domain.
    Affected if More than one domain (including secondary/non-default domains) is configured in the system.
  4. Identify admin users in secondary domains
    In the Liquidfiles admin interface, review the user list for each secondary domain. Look for users assigned the Admin role within those secondary domains. Check group memberships that grant domain-level administrative privileges.
    Affected if There are users with Admin privileges specifically assigned to secondary (non-default) domains.
  5. Verify group modification permissions for secondary domain admins
    As a secondary domain Admin user, attempt to access or modify system-level groups (such as the 'sysadmins' group or groups granting sysadmin privileges) from within the secondary domain context. Check if the access control properly restricts such modifications.
    Affected if A secondary domain Admin can modify or access system-level groups or privileges beyond their delegated domain scope.

The environment is affected if Liquidfiles version is below 4.2.12 AND secondary (non-default) domains with Admin users exist, allowing privilege escalation through improper access control boundaries.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to Liquidfiles version 4.2.12 or later which contains the fix for this broken access control vulnerability.

Recommended fix High confidence

4.2.12

  1. Review the Liquidfiles upgrade documentation at docs.liquidfiles.com for your current version
  2. Ensure you have a complete backup of your Liquidfiles installation and database
  3. Download Liquidfiles version 4.2.12 from the official source
  4. Follow the standard upgrade procedure to apply version 4.2.12
  5. Verify that the upgrade completed successfully
  6. Test that admin users in secondary domains can no longer escalate privileges to Sysadmin
Caveat Review the 4.2.12 release notes for any potential compatibility or configuration changes before upgrading

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12673 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-12673 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data