CVE-2026-47164
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 · uneditedVaultwarden is a Bitwarden-compatible server written in Rust. Prior to 1.36.0, Vaultwarden's SSO login flow checked the IdP email_verified claim only for new-user creation and not when SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL=true linked an IdP identity to an existing local account, allowing an attacker-controlled IdP identity asserting a victim email address to bind to and authenticate as that account. This issue is fixed in version 1.36.0.
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 confidenceIn Vaultwarden versions prior to 1.36.0, the SSO login flow only validates the IdP's email_verified claim when creating new users. When SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL=true links an IdP identity to an existing local account, the email_verified claim is not checked, allowing an attacker controlling an IdP to assert a victim's email address and bind to that victim's existing account for authentication.
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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
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 Vaultwarden versionCheck the running Vaultwarden container or binary version (e.g., docker ps, admin page, or --version flag). Compare the version number to 1.36.0.Affected if Version is below 1.36.0 (e.g., 1.35.0, 1.34.0, etc.)
-
Verify SSO is enabledInspect the Vaultwarden configuration for any SSO/IdP provider setup (SAML, OIDC, OpenID). Check environment variables or configuration files for related settings like SSO_ENABLED, SAML, OIDC, or specific IdP variables.Affected if SSO/IdP authentication is configured and active
-
Check SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL settingExamine Vaultwarden environment variables or configuration for SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL. View the current value using: docker exec <container> env | grep SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL or check the admin panel if accessible.Affected if SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL is set to true or 1
User is affected if Vaultwarden is below version 1.36.0 AND SSO is enabled AND SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL is true, allowing email_verified claim bypass during account linking.
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 · scopedUpgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.36.0 or later which properly validates the email_verified claim during SSO account linking for existing users.
1.36.0
- 1. Back up your Vaultwarden data directory and any configuration files before upgrading.
- 2. Stop the Vaultwarden service/container.
- 3. Upgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.36.0 or later using your deployment method (e.g., Docker pull vaultwarden/server:1.36.0, or update your package manager).
- 4. Restart the Vaultwarden service/container.
- 5. Verify the SSO login flow works correctly and that the email_verified claim is now enforced for existing account linking when SSO_SIGNUPS_MATCH_EMAIL=true.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-47164 — 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-2026-47164 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