dbcve.org
EasydiscussApplication · Stackideas

CVE-2026-21623

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-01-16
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 5.0.15 or later.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable

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
Lack of input filterung leads to a persistent XSS vulnerability in the forum post handling of the Easy Discuss component for Joomla.

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

A persistent (stored) cross-site scripting vulnerability exists in the Easy Discuss component for Joomla's forum post handling functionality. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input filtering, allowing malicious scripts to be stored in the database and executed when other users view the affected posts.

MitigationImplement proper input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied content in forum posts. Apply context-appropriate sanitization (e.g., HTML sanitization for post content) before storage and encode output when rendering posts to users.

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
EasydiscussApplication
Affected:>= 1.0.0, <= 5.0.15

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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 checks

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

  1. Verify Easydiscuss is installed
    Log into the Joomla administrator backend and navigate to Components > Easy Discuss. If the component appears in the menu, it is installed.
    Affected if The component is present in the Joomla installation.
  2. Identify installed Easydiscuss version
    In the Joomla admin panel, go to Components > Easy Discuss > Settings, or check the #__extensions database table for the easydiscuss package version entry. Compare the version number to the affected range of 1.0.0 to 5.0.15.
    Affected if The installed version is >= 1.0.0 and <= 5.0.15.
  3. Confirm forum post functionality is accessible
    Check if the forum category and post creation features are enabled for user access. Navigate to Components > Easy Discuss > Categories and verify that at least one forum category is published and accessible to frontend users.
    Affected if Users can create or edit forum posts on the site.
  4. Inspect post content in the database
    Query the Joomla database, specifically the #__discuss_posts or equivalent table that stores Easydiscuss posts. Look for HTML script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributes in the raw post content fields.
    Affected if The database contains posts with unescaped HTML script tags or JavaScript event handlers in the content fields.
  5. Test post rendering for XSS execution
    Create a test forum post containing a benign payload such as <script>alert('XSS')</script> in the post body, then view that post as a different user or in a browser to see if the script executes.
    Affected if The payload renders as executable JavaScript rather than being escaped or stripped.

A user is affected if Easydiscuss version 1.0.0 through 5.0.15 is installed and forum post creation is enabled, with unsanitized scripts stored in or executable from forum posts.

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 5.0.15
Interim mitigation

Implement proper input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied content in forum posts. Apply context-appropriate sanitization (e.g., HTML sanitization for post content) before storage and encode output when rendering posts to users.

Fix this in Easydiscuss Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-21623 — 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-2026-21623 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