CVE-2026-28398
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 · uneditedNocoDB is software for building databases as spreadsheets. Prior to version 0.301.3, user-controlled content in comments and rich text cells was rendered via v-html without sanitization, enabling stored XSS. This issue has been patched in version 0.301.3.
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 confidenceNocoDB versions prior to 0.301.3 contain a stored XSS vulnerability where user-controlled content in comments and rich text cells is rendered using Vue's v-html directive without any sanitization. This allows attackers to inject malicious HTML/JavaScript that executes in the browsers of other users viewing the content.
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< 0.301.3CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 NocoDB versionCheck the NocoDB version running in your environment. This is typically visible in the UI footer, in the package.json file of the installation directory, or via the API endpoint that returns version information.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 0.301.3 (e.g., 0.301.2, 0.300.x, 0.299.x, etc.)
-
Determine if comments feature is in useNavigate to any table or grid view in NocoDB and check if the comments panel (typically accessible via a comment icon) contains any user-submitted content.Affected if Comments are enabled and contain any content from users who may have inserted HTML markup into their messages
-
Inspect rich text cells for unescaped contentOpen tables that use rich text (long text with rich text formatting enabled) columns. View the rendered content in grid or card view, noting how text with HTML-like tags (e.g., <script>, <img onerror=, <a href=) appears.Affected if Rich text cells display raw HTML tags as rendered HTML rather than as escaped text, or if content containing script tags executes when viewed
You are affected if your NocoDB installation version is below 0.301.3 AND you have users actively using the comments or rich text cell features where untrusted content could have been stored.
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 · scoped0.301.3
Upgrade to NocoDB version 0.301.3 or later, which includes sanitization for v-html rendered content.
0.301.3
- Backup your current NocoDB installation and database before upgrading
- Upgrade NocoDB to version 0.301.3 or later
- Verify that the upgrade was successful by logging in and checking the application is functioning normally
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-2026-28398 — 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-2026-28398 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