CVE-2026-27468
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 · uneditedMastodon is a free, open-source social network server based on ActivityPub. FASP registration requires manual approval by an administrator. In versions 4.4.0 through 4.4.13 and 4.5.0 through 4.5.6, actions performed by a FASP to subscribe to account/content lifecycle events or to backfill content did not check properly whether the FASP was actually approved. This only affects Mastodon servers that have opted in to testing the experimental FASP feature by setting the environment variable `EXPERIMENTAL_FEATURES` to a value including `fasp`. An attacker can make subscriptions and request content backfill without approval by an administrator. Done once, this leads to minor information leak of URIs that are publicly available anyway. But done several times this is a serious vector for DOS, putting pressure on the sidekiq worker responsible for the `fasp` queue. The fix is included in the 4.4.14 and 4.5.7 releases. Admins that are actively testing the experimental "fasp" feature should update their systems. Servers not using the experimental feature flag `fasp` are not affected.
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 analysisThe application checks who you are but not whether you're allowed to perform a given action, so any authenticated user can reach things meant for others. This is the classic “change the ID in the URL” bug. The fix is an authorization check on every request, evaluated against the acting user's permissions.
General guidance for the missing authorization class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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>= 4.4.0, < 4.4.14>= 4.5.0, < 4.5.7CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
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 · scoped4.4.144.5.7
Mastodon 4.4.14 or 4.5.7 (depending on your current minor version branch)
- Upgrade to Mastodon 4.4.14 if currently on 4.4.x, or upgrade to 4.5.7 if currently on 4.5.x
- If running in a staging environment, test the upgrade there first before deploying to production
- After upgrade, verify the fix by reviewing the commit at https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/commit/6ba6285a73c3a8b281123814d45f534e3bcebb96
- If still using the experimental FASP feature, confirm the authorization checks are now properly validating FASP approval status before allowing subscriptions or content backfill
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27468 — 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-2026-27468 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