CVE-2026-33427
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, an unauthenticated attacker can cause a legitimate Discourse authorization page to display an attacker-controlled domain, facilitating social engineering attacks against users. 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 · high confidenceThis is an open redirect/URL manipulation vulnerability in Discourse's OAuth/authorization flow. An unauthenticated attacker can influence the authorization page to display an attacker-controlled domain, facilitating credential theft or session hijacking via social engineering.
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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Determine installed Discourse versionAccess the Discourse admin panel at /admin, or run `cd /var/www/discourse && git describe --tags` or check the version file in the Discourse installation directoryAffected if The version falls within >= 2026.1.0 and < 2026.1.2, OR >= 2026.2.0 and < 2026.2.1, OR equals 2026.3.0
-
Verify OAuth authorization is configuredCheck if any OAuth provider (Google, GitHub, Facebook, custom SAML, OIDC, etc.) is enabled in the Discourse admin panel under /admin/plugins or by inspecting the site settings databaseAffected if OAuth or any external authentication provider is enabled and configured for user login
-
Inspect OAuth redirect URL configurationReview the allowed_redirect_domains or similar OAuth callback/whitelist settings in Discourse admin or site settings. Look for entries that may permit external untrusted domainsAffected if The redirect URL whitelist contains domains not controlled by the organization or allows wildcard/arbitrary domain redirects
-
Check for suspicious authorization callback URLsExamine server access logs or OAuth provider configuration for recent authorization requests with unusual redirect parameters pointing to unfamiliar domainsAffected if Authorization requests are being logged with redirect URLs pointing to domains other than the legitimate Discourse instance
A user is affected if their Discourse version is one of the vulnerable releases AND OAuth/external authentication is enabled, regardless of redirect configuration state since the vulnerability allows attacker-influenced redirect manipulation during the OAuth flow.
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.
2026.1.2 (for 2026.1.x branch), 2026.2.1 (for 2026.2.x branch), or 2026.3.0-latest.1 (for 2026.3.x branch)
- Identify the currently installed Discourse version by checking the /admin/about page or running `git rev-parse HEAD` in the Discourse directory
- Determine which version branch you are on (2026.1.x, 2026.2.x, or 2026.3.x)
- If on 2026.1.x branch: upgrade to version 2026.1.2
- If on 2026.2.x branch: upgrade to version 2026.2.1
- If on 2026.3.x branch: upgrade to version 2026.3.0-latest.1
- Run the Discourse upgrade commands (typically `./launcher rebuild app` for Docker installations)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version in /admin/about
- Confirm the vulnerability is patched by testing the OAuth/authorization flow to ensure the redirect domain is properly validated
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,416.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-33427 — 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-2026-33427 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