CVE-2026-15188
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 · uneditedA weakness has been identified in manjurulhoque django-job-portal up to dfa352f305bba44445ac5dc12e9b2a98c9dcd71f. Affected by this vulnerability is the function EditEmployeeProfileAPIView of the file accounts/api/views.py of the component Employee Dashboard Endpoint. This manipulation of the argument role causes improper access controls. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. This product uses a rolling release model to deliver continuous updates. As a result, specific version information for affected or updated releases is not available. 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 confidenceThis is an improper access control vulnerability (IDOR) in the EditEmployeeProfileAPIView function within accounts/api/views.py. The role parameter is not properly validated server-side, allowing authenticated users to manipulate their role to escalate privileges beyond what they should have access to.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate the EditEmployeeProfileAPIView in your codebaseSearch your source code repositories for 'EditEmployeeProfileAPIView' or 'EditEmployeeProfile' to find the file and endpoint implementing this API function.Affected if Your application contains an API endpoint named EditEmployeeProfile or similar that handles employee profile modifications.
-
Inspect the role modification logicExamine the code within the EditEmployeeProfileAPIView function, specifically looking for how the 'role' parameter is handled when a profile update request is received.Affected if The function accepts a role parameter and processes it without explicit mention of authorization checks in the code.
-
Verify authorization decorators or permission classesReview the class-based view or function decorators for @permission_classes, @require_http_methods, or similar access control annotations on the EditEmployeeProfileAPIView.Affected if No permission classes are defined, or the defined permissions do not explicitly verify the requester's authority to modify roles.
-
Check for role parameter validation before database updateSearch the function for any role validation logic that verifies the requesting user has admin or HR-level privileges before allowing role changes to be persisted.Affected if There is no code that validates the caller's permissions before accepting and saving a new role value.
-
Test API behavior with a non-privileged accountIf you have access to the running application, use a standard user account to call the profile edit endpoint with an elevated role value and observe whether the role is changed without authorization error.Affected if A regular user can successfully modify their own role to an administrator or higher-privilege role through the API.
You are affected if your application contains an EditEmployeeProfileAPIView endpoint that processes role changes without verifying the requesting user has permission to modify roles.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataImplement server-side authorization checks to verify the requesting user has permission to modify the role field. Restrict role modifications to admin-level users only and prevent users from elevating their own privileges.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-15188 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-15188 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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