CVE-2026-27994
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 · uneditedImproper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in ThemeREX Tediss tediss allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects Tediss: from n/a through <= 1.2.4.
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 confidenceA Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability exists in ThemeREX Tediss plugin/theme where user-supplied input is improperly used in PHP include/require statements without sufficient validation. This allows attackers to include arbitrary local PHP files, potentially leading to code execution.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if ThemeREX Tediss is installedSearch web root directories for themerx or tediss related folders. Common paths include wp-content/plugins/ or wp-content/themes/. Check for directories or files containing 'themerx' or 'tediss' in the name.Affected if ThemeREX Tediss plugin or theme directory exists on the server
-
Locate PHP files with include/require statementsSearch the themerx/tediss directory for PHP files that contain include, include_once, require, or require_once statements. Use grep or similar: grep -r 'include\|require' /path/to/tediss/Affected if PHP files using dynamic include/require without sanitization are found
-
Inspect include/require for user input usageExamine the PHP files found for patterns where $_GET, $_POST, or $_REQUEST parameters are used directly in include/require statements without validation. Look for patterns like 'include($_GET["file"])' or 'require($page)'Affected if User-supplied parameters are used directly in include/require without validation checks
-
Check for parameter filteringLook for input validation functions, whitelist checks, or path sanitization before the include/require statements. Search for functions like basename(), realpath(), or whitelist arrays.Affected if No validation, whitelist, or sanitization is performed on the user input before inclusion
-
Test for LFI if parameter is knownIf a vulnerable parameter is identified (commonly 'file', 'page', 'template', or 'theme'), attempt a safe test by requesting a known local file path through the parameter, observing if content is returned.Affected if Local PHP files can be included via HTTP requests using the vulnerable parameter
Your environment is affected if ThemeREX Tediss is installed and contains PHP include/require statements that use unsanitized user input from request parameters.
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 strict input validation and whitelist-based file inclusion logic to ensure only authorized files can be included. Update to a patched version when available, or disable the affected component if no fix is available.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-27994 — 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-2026-27994 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