CVE-2026-27149
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 · uneditedDiscourse is an open source discussion platform. Prior to versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0, SQL injection in PM tag filtering (`list_private_messages_tag`) allows bypassing tag filter conditions, potentially disclosing unauthorized private message metadata. Versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, and 2026.2.0 patch the issue. No known workarounds are available.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Discourse's private message tag filtering function (`list_private_messages_tag`) allows attackers to bypass tag filter conditions and potentially access private message metadata they are not authorized to view.
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< 2025.12.2>= 2026.1.0, < 2026.1.1= 2026.2.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check installed Discourse versionAccess the Discourse admin panel (/admin) or check the version file in the Discourse installation directory. The version is typically displayed on the admin dashboard or can be obtained via the /admin/version route on the server.Affected if The installed version is < 2025.12.2 OR >= 2026.1.0 and < 2026.1.1 OR = 2026.2.0 exactly.
-
Identify private message tag usageReview whether the private messaging system with tag filtering is enabled and in use. Check if users have access to the private message tag filtering feature in the Discourse UI.Affected if Private messages with tag filtering functionality is actively used or configurable in the environment.
-
Verify admin API accessCheck the Discourse admin API endpoints for any anomalous SQL queries in logs, particularly around the list_private_messages_tag function or private message tag-related routes.Affected if Unexplained SQL errors or unusual query patterns appear in logs related to private message tag operations.
A user is affected if their Discourse installation version falls within the vulnerable version ranges AND they have private messaging with tag filtering enabled or accessible.
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 · scoped2025.12.22026.1.1
Upgrade to Discourse versions 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, or 2026.2.0 or later. No workarounds are available.
2026.2.0 (latest patched version)
- Back up your Discourse instance before upgrading
- Upgrade Discourse to version 2025.12.2, 2026.1.1, or 2026.2.0
- After upgrade, verify the patch was applied by checking the Discourse version
- Test that the PM tag filtering functionality works correctly post-upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27149 — 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-2026-27149 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