CVE-2026-1978
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 vulnerability was detected in kalyan02 NanoCMS up to 0.4. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /data/pagesdata.txt of the component User Information Handler. Performing a manipulation results in direct request. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. You should change the configuration settings.
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 confidenceNanoCMS versions up to 0.4 contain a direct request vulnerability in the User Information Handler component. The /data/pagesdata.txt file can be accessed directly without proper authentication, allowing remote attackers to retrieve sensitive user information. This is a classic IDOR (Insecure Direct Object Reference) or missing authorization check issue.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data<= 0.4CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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.
-
Identify NanoCMS installation and versionLocate NanoCMS on your web server and determine the installed version. Check for files like index.php, nano.php, or typical NanoCMS directories. Compare the version number against the affected range: <= 0.4Affected if The installed NanoCMS version is 0.4 or earlier
-
Verify the vulnerable file existsCheck if the file /data/pagesdata.txt exists in the web root or application directory of your NanoCMS installationAffected if The /data/pagesdata.txt file is present in the application directory
-
Test unauthenticated access to the sensitive fileUsing a web browser or curl command, attempt to access http://your-site/path/to/nanocms/data/pagesdata.txt without providing any authentication credentialsAffected if The file is served and returns HTTP 200 without requiring login or session validation
-
Inspect file contents for sensitive dataIf the file is accessible, examine its contents to confirm it contains user information such as usernames, passwords, emails, or administrative dataAffected if The retrieved file contains plain text or weakly hashed user credentials, administrative usernames, or other personal information
You are affected if NanoCMS version 0.4 or earlier is installed and the /data/pagesdata.txt file is directly accessible without authentication, exposing user data.
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 dataRestrict direct access to the /data/pagesdata.txt file by implementing proper authentication and authorization checks. Configure web server rules or application-level access controls to prevent unauthenticated access to sensitive data files.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-1978 — 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-2026-1978 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