CVE-2026-27936
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 2026.3.0-latest.1, 2026.2.1, and 2026.1.2, a restriction bypass allows restricted post action counts to be disclosed to non-privileged users through a carefully crafted request. Versions 2026.3.0-latest.1, 2026.2.1, and 2026.1.2 contain a patch. 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 · moderate confidenceDiscourse versions prior to 2026.3.0-latest.1, 2026.2.1, and 2026.1.2 contain an authorization bypass allowing non-privileged users to discover restricted post action counts (e.g., likes, flags, bookmarks) through a crafted API request. The vulnerability stems from improper enforcement of access controls on post action metadata.
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>= 2026.1.0, < 2026.1.2>= 2026.2.0, < 2026.2.1= 2026.3.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Identify installed Discourse versionAccess the Discourse admin panel at /admin, or run 'git log' in the Discourse installation directory, or check the VERSION file in the Discourse root if availableAffected if The installed version is >= 2026.1.0 and < 2026.1.2, OR >= 2026.2.0 and < 2026.2.1, OR equals 2026.3.0 exactly
-
Verify API endpoint accessibilitySend a crafted GET request to the /posts/{id}/actions.json endpoint for a restricted or private post while authenticated as a non-privileged (non-staff) userAffected if The API response returns action counts (likes, flags, bookmarks) that should be hidden from non-privileged users, indicating the authorization bypass is present
-
Check user role permissionsIn the Discourse admin panel under /admin/users, verify whether standard/trust_level users exist and whether certain categories or posts have restricted visibility settingsAffected if Non-privileged users have access to view restricted content through the API but should not be able to see the action counts according to access controls
A user is affected if their Discourse installation version falls within 2026.1.0 to 2026.1.11, 2026.2.0 to 2026.2.0, or equals 2026.3.0, AND the API endpoint returns restricted post action counts to non-privileged users.
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 · scoped2026.1.22026.2.1
Upgrade Discourse to version 2026.3.0-latest.1, 2026.2.1, or 2026.1.2. No workarounds are available.
2026.3.0-latest.1 (or 2026.2.1 / 2026.1.2 depending on your release track)
- Identify your current Discourse version by checking the admin dashboard or running discourse version command
- Stop the Discourse application to prevent data inconsistency during upgrade
- Backup your Discourse database and uploaded files following standard backup procedures
- Upgrade to a fixed release: 2026.1.2, 2026.2.1, or 2026.3.0-latest.1 (prefer the latest for most recent security patches)
- Follow the official Discourse upgrade guide for your deployment method (e.g., ./launcher rebuild app for Docker installations)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version in the admin dashboard
- Test that restricted post action counts are now properly protected from non-privileged users
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27936 — 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-2026-27936 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