CVE-2026-21721
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 · uneditedThe dashboard permissions API does not verify the target dashboard scope and only checks the dashboards.permissions:* action. As a result, a user who has permission management rights on one dashboard can read and modify permissions on other dashboards. This is an organization‑internal privilege escalation.
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 · high confidenceThe dashboard permissions API has a broken access control where it only validates the dashboards.permissions:* action without verifying the target dashboard scope. This allows any user with permission management rights on one dashboard to read and modify permissions across all dashboards in the organization, enabling internal privilege escalation.
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>= 10.2.0, < 11.6.9>= 12.0.0, < 12.0.8>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5>= 12.2.0, < 12.2.3= 11.6.9= 12.0.8= 12.1.5= 12.2.3= 12.3.0= 12.3.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 Grafana versionRun `grafana-server --version` or check the version file typically at /usr/share/grafana/version or in the grafana.ini config fileAffected if The installed version falls within the affected ranges: >= 10.2.0 < 11.6.9, >= 12.0.0 < 12.0.8, >= 12.1.0 < 12.1.5, >= 12.2.0 < 12.2.3, or equals 11.6.9, 12.0.8, 12.1.5, 12.2.3, 12.3.0, 12.3.1
-
Check for dashboards.permissions role assignmentsInspect Grafana organization permissions or role definitions for any user or team assigned the dashboards.permissions:* action. This can be done via Grafana HTTP API: GET /api/access-control/org/roles or through the UI at /org/permissionsAffected if Any user or service account has been assigned the dashboards.permissions:* permission scope
-
Verify dashboard-level permission boundariesReview which dashboards a user with dashboards.permissions:* can access. Use the API GET /api/dashboards/uid/{uid} for multiple dashboards to see if a user with limited dashboard access can query permissions for dashboards they should not ownAffected if A user with access to only specific dashboards can retrieve or modify permissions on dashboards outside their assigned scope
-
Inspect dashboard permissions API responsesMake a test API call to the permissions endpoint for a dashboard the user should not own: GET /api/dashboards/uid/{target-dashboard-uid}/permissions. Compare the response to what the user should actually be able to access based on their explicit dashboard permissionsAffected if The API returns permission data for dashboards the user does not own or has not been explicitly granted access to
You are affected if your Grafana version is one of the affected versions listed AND any user has been granted the dashboards.permissions:* permission scope that could access dashboards beyond their intended scope.
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.
dbcve · scoped11.6.912.0.812.1.5
Implement proper scope verification in the dashboard permissions API to ensure users can only modify permissions for dashboards they are explicitly authorized to manage, not just any dashboard.
Upgrade to Grafana 11.6.9 (for 10.x users) or 12.2.3 (for 12.x users) or later
- 1. Identify the currently installed Grafana version using `grafana-cli --version` or checking the grafana-server logs
- 2. Determine which version branch you are on (10.x, 12.0.x, 12.1.x, or 12.2.x)
- 3. For Grafana 10.x users: upgrade to version 11.6.9 or later (recommended: latest 11.x LTS)
- 4. For Grafana 12.0.x users: upgrade to version 12.0.8 or later
- 5. For Grafana 12.1.x users: upgrade to version 12.1.5 or later
- 6. For Grafana 12.2.x users: upgrade to version 12.2.3 or later
- 7. Download the appropriate upgrade package from grafana.com or your distribution package repository
- 8. Backup your Grafana database (SQLite, PostgreSQL, or MySQL) and configuration files before upgrading
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-21721 — 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-2026-21721 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