CVE-2026-41325
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 · uneditedKirby is an open-source content management system. Kirby's user permissions control which user role is allowed to perform specific actions to content models in the CMS. These permissions are defined for each role in the user blueprint (`site/blueprints/users/...`). It is also possible to customize the permissions for each target model in the model blueprints (such as in `site/blueprints/pages/...`) using the `options` feature. The permissions and options together control the authorization of user actions. Kirby provides the `pages.create`, `files.create` and `users.create` permissions (among others). These permissions can again be set in the user blueprint and/or in the blueprint of the target model via `options`. Prior to versions 4.9.0 and 5.4.0, Kirby allowed to override the `options` during the creation of pages, files and users by injecting custom dynamic blueprint configuration into the model data. The injected `options` could include `'create' => true`, which then caused an override of the permissions and options configured by the site developer in the user and model blueprints. The problem has been patched in Kirby 4.9.0 and Kirby 5.4.0. The patched versions have updated the normalization code that is used during the creation of pages, files and users to include a filter for the `blueprint` property. This prevents the injection of dynamic blueprint configuration into the creation request.
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 analysisAn authorization check exists but is flawed, so it passes when it should fail. Attackers probe roles and object references to find the gap. Remediation means centralising and correctly implementing the access-control logic, then testing it against every role.
General guidance for the incorrect authorization class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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< 4.9.0>= 5.0.0, < 5.4.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 · scoped4.9.05.4.0
Kirby 4.9.0 (for 4.x line) or Kirby 5.4.0 (for 5.x line)
- Identify the current Kirby major version in use (4.x or 5.x)
- For Kirby 4.x users: upgrade to version 4.9.0 or later
- For Kirby 5.x users: upgrade to version 5.4.0 or later
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the Kirby version in the admin panel or via composer
- Test that user permissions are enforced correctly, especially for page, file, and user creation actions
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41325 — 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-2026-41325 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