Improper AuthenticationWeakness · CWE-287

CVE-2026-14627

MEDIUM · 5.6 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-07-04
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 No privileges 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 security vulnerability has been detected in NousResearch hermes-agent up to 0.15.2. This affects the function DiscordAdapter._is_allowed_user of the file gateway/platforms/discord.py of the component Discord Platform Integration. Such manipulation leads to improper authentication. The attack can be launched remotely. This attack is characterized by high complexity. The exploitability is reported as difficult. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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

The vulnerability exists in the DiscordAdapter._is_allowed_user function within the Discord platform integration (gateway/platforms/discord.py). This authorization check fails to properly validate whether a user should be granted access, allowing improper authentication - likely permitting unauthorized users to authenticate through the Discord platform when they should be denied.

MitigationReview and fix the _is_allowed_user authorization logic in the Discord platform integration to properly validate user permissions before granting access. Verify all Discord authentication paths enforce correct authorization checks.

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/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. Confirm Discord platform integration is in use
    Inspect your codebase for the presence of gateway/platforms/discord.py and check if Discord is listed as an enabled authentication platform in your configuration files or environment settings
    Affected if The Discord platform integration is enabled and the application accepts Discord-based authentication
  2. Locate the _is_allowed_user function
    Open gateway/platforms/discord.py and locate the DiscordAdapter class definition, then find the _is_allowed_user method within it
    Affected if The function exists in the codebase and is used for authorization decisions
  3. Inspect the authorization logic
    Read the implementation of _is_allowed_user and examine how it validates user permissions - look for missing validation calls, hardcoded allow lists, or conditional statements that always return true
    Affected if The function contains logic that allows access without properly validating user permissions (e.g., returns True unconditionally, skips permission checks, or has flawed conditional logic)
  4. Check authentication flow for bypasses
    Trace all code paths that call _is_allowed_user during the Discord authentication process and verify that authorization is enforced before granting access tokens or session creation
    Affected if Authentication flows bypass the _is_allowed_user check or do not enforce its results before allowing user access

You are affected if your environment uses the Discord platform integration and the _is_allowed_user function fails to properly validate user permissions before granting authentication access.

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

Review and fix the _is_allowed_user authorization logic in the Discord platform integration to properly validate user permissions before granting access. Verify all Discord authentication paths enforce correct authorization checks.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,130
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-14627 — 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-2026-14627 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