CVE-2026-50280
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 · uneditedCraft CMS is a content management system (CMS). In versions 5.0.0-RC1 and above prior to 5.9.21, the EntriesController::actionMoveToSection() endpoint gates the destination section only by viewEntries:$section->uid rather than requiring saveEntries permission (the source entry is separately checked via Entry::canMove()). As a result, a low-privileged authenticated control-panel user who can move an entry out of its current section can call moveEntryToSection() to rewrite the entry's sectionId and save it into a section where they have read access but no write access. This breaks the section-level authorization model, letting a user with limited permissions inject content into a protected section and interfere with editorial boundaries, approval workflows, and section-specific business logic. This issue has been fixed in version 5.9.21.
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 analysisThe application fails to correctly restrict what a user can do or reach, so functions or resources are available to people who should not have them. Attackers simply probe for the paths where the check is missing or wrong. The fix is to enforce access-control decisions consistently on every request, evaluated against the acting user rather than assumed from context.
General guidance for the improper access control class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 · scoped5.9.21
- 1. Backup your Craft CMS database and files before proceeding with any upgrade.
- 2. Upgrade Craft CMS to version 5.9.21 or later by running `composer require craftcms/cms:^5.9.21` or using your preferred composer update method.
- 3. After upgrading, clear caches by running `./craft clear-caches/all` to ensure the new permission checks take effect.
- 4. Verify the fix: Confirm that low-privileged users can no longer move entries to sections where they only have view access but lack save permissions.
- 5. Test editorial workflows to ensure the section-level authorization now works correctly, preventing unauthorized content injection into protected sections.
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-2026-50280 — 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-2026-50280 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