CVE-2026-27802
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 · uneditedVaultwarden is an unofficial Bitwarden compatible server written in Rust, formerly known as bitwarden_rs. Prior to version 1.35.4, there is a privilege escalation vulnerability via bulk permission update to unauthorized collections by Manager. This issue has been patched in version 1.35.4.
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 confidenceVaultwarden versions prior to 1.35.4 contain a privilege escalation vulnerability where a user with Manager role can update permissions on collections they are not authorized to access via the bulk permission update functionality. This allows unauthorized access to sensitive collections.
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< 1.35.4CVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 Vaultwarden installation methodDetermine how Vaultwarden is deployed: check for Docker container, binary executable, or package manager installation in your environmentAffected if Vaultwarden is installed and running
-
Determine installed Vaultwarden versionRun 'docker ps' to find the container, then 'docker inspect <container_id>' or check the image tag; or for binary installations, run the vaultwarden binary with --version flagAffected if Version is lower than 1.35.4 (e.g., 1.35.0, 1.30.0, etc.)
-
Identify Manager role usersLog into Vaultwarden as an administrator, navigate to the Users or Members section, and review all users assigned the Manager roleAffected if Any users are assigned the Manager role in the system
-
Audit collection permission changesReview Vaultwarden logs for bulk permission update operations on collections - look for API calls to /api/collections/{id}/users or similar endpoints that modify collection access permissions in batchAffected if Bulk permission update operations have been performed on collections
You are affected if Vaultwarden version is below 1.35.4 AND you have users with Manager role who may have performed bulk permission updates on collections they should not access
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 · scoped1.35.4
Upgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.35.4 or later to patch the vulnerability.
Vaultwarden 1.35.4
- Upgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.35.4 or later to remediate the privilege escalation vulnerability
- Verify the upgrade was successful and the service is running correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27802 — 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-2026-27802 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