Incorrect Privilege AssignmentWeakness · CWE-266

CVE-2026-13544

MEDIUM · 6.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click 7 weeks old

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
A flaw has been found in Feehi CMS up to 2.1.1. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /api/users of the component API. This manipulation causes improper access controls. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

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

Feehi CMS up to version 2.1.1 has improper access controls on the /api/users API endpoint, allowing remote attackers to access or manipulate user data without proper authorization. The vulnerability affects the API component's user-related functionality.

MitigationUntil a vendor patch is released, restrict network access to the /api/users endpoint (e.g., via firewall or WAF rules) and implement role-based access control (RBAC) at the application level. Consider disabling the API if not needed.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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

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 Feehi CMS installation
    Locate Feehi CMS on the system by checking web server document roots for common Feehi CMS file structures (e.g., index.php, common/config/main.php, or similar CMS directory structures)
    Affected if Feehi CMS is present on the server
  2. Determine installed version
    Check the version file or admin panel for the Feehi CMS version number. Look for version.php, composer.json, or the admin dashboard version display
    Affected if Version is 2.1.1 or lower
  3. Verify API endpoint exists
    Confirm the /api/users endpoint is accessible by reviewing application routing configuration (e.g., api/config/main.php or equivalent routing files) and testing the endpoint with a web request
    Affected if The /api/users endpoint is registered and accessible in the application
  4. Test endpoint access control
    Send an HTTP request to /api/users (GET for listing users, or POST for creating users) without providing authentication credentials or using an unauthenticated session
    Affected if The endpoint returns user data or allows operations without requiring valid authentication or authorization
  5. Check API authentication configuration
    Inspect the API component's authentication middleware or controller code (typically in api/controllers or api/modules) to determine if user authorization is enforced before processing requests to /api/users
    Affected if No authentication check is found or authentication is improperly implemented for this endpoint

A system is affected if Feehi CMS version 2.1.1 or lower is installed and the /api/users endpoint can be accessed or manipulated without proper authentication.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Until a vendor patch is released, restrict network access to the /api/users endpoint (e.g., via firewall or WAF rules) and implement role-based access control (RBAC) at the application level. Consider disabling the API if not needed.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
17.0 hours of engineering $3,000
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-13544 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

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-2026-13544 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