CVE-2026-27387
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 · uneditedMissing Authorization vulnerability in Designinvento DirectoryPress directorypress allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects DirectoryPress: from n/a through <= 3.6.26.
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 confidenceA missing authorization vulnerability in DirectoryPress allows attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. This means users can access functionality or data they should not have permission to view or modify due to improper access control checks in the application.
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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Identify DirectoryPress installationCheck for DirectoryPress files in the web root (look for directorypress index.php or admin files)Affected if DirectoryPress is present on the server
-
Check access control configurationReview DirectoryPress security settings in the admin panel under Access Control, Security Levels, or User Roles configuration pagesAffected if Security levels are set to allow public or unprivileged access to sensitive functionality
-
Inspect role-based access control settingsExamine user role definitions and permissions in the database table wp_options (key: directorypress_access_control) or in config filesAffected if Roles have been configured with overly permissive access that bypasses authorization checks
-
Test sensitive endpoint accessAttempt to access admin functions, user data export, or sensitive directories without proper authentication/authorizationAffected if Access is granted without proper role verification
-
Verify authorization enforcement in codeSearch DirectoryPress source code for functions lacking capability checks (current_user_can, role verification) before sensitive operationsAffected if Critical functions lack proper authorization checks before executing
If DirectoryPress is installed and access control/security levels are configured with insufficient restrictions or missing authorization checks, the environment is vulnerable to this issue.
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 proper authorization checks across all sensitive endpoints and functions, ensuring role-based access control (RBAC) is correctly enforced at the application level.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27387 — 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-2026-27387 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