CVE-2026-50876
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 · uneditedA cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Deck9 Input v2.0.1 allows attackers to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTML via a crafted payload.
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 · moderate confidenceA cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Deck9 Input v2.0.1 allows attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts or HTML through a crafted payload, likely via unsanitized user input being reflected in the application's output.
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
- 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 Deck9 Input versionCheck the application's version file, about page, or run: deck9-input --version (or check package.json/composer.json if it's a web app)Affected if The installed version matches v2.0.1 or falls within the v2.0.x range without security patches applied
-
Locate input handling componentsInspect the application's source code for endpoints or functions that accept user-supplied data, particularly search fields, form inputs, or URL parametersAffected if User input fields exist that process and display data without visible sanitization code nearby
-
Verify output encoding implementationSearch the codebase for functions like htmlspecialchars(), strip_tags(), or similar sanitization functions applied to user inputs before renderingAffected if No output encoding functions are found between user input collection and output rendering points, or if encoding is conditionally applied only to certain inputs
-
Test for reflected input in application responsesSubmit a benign test payload such as <script>alert('XSS')</script> in any user input field and observe if the raw payload appears unescaped in the responseAffected if The test payload renders as executable HTML/JavaScript rather than being escaped or stripped from the output
You are affected if Deck9 Input v2.0.1 is running, user input fields exist without proper output encoding, and the test payload reflects unescaped in responses.
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.
From vendor dataImplement robust input validation and output encoding/escaping on all user-controlled inputs to prevent script injection; consider implementing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers as an additional defense layer.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-50876 — 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-2026-50876 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