Incorrect Authorization

Discourse is an open-source discussion platform. Prior to 2026.9.0, 2026.8.1, 2026.7.3, and 2026.1.9, sites with secure uploads enabled did not reconcile existing upload security metadata when a previously public category became read-restricted or when category permissions changed during a bulk import. Media and attachments uploaded while the category was public retained a public accessibility flag and remained reachable by anonymous users through their short upload URLs, including uploads associated with deleted topics. This issue is fixed in versions 2026.9.0, 2026.8.1, 2026.7.3, and 2026.1.9.Show less

Gitea's web attachment handler skips its cross-repository ownership check for attachments created before 16 January 2026 and checks permissions against the repository named in the request URL instead. An unauthenticated attacker who knows a private attachment's UUID can request it through a public repository's attachment path and retrieve its contents. This can expose issue and pull request attachments or release assets; the random attachment UUID must already be known to the attacker.Show less

Gitea allows a token with write:user scope to register an attacker-controlled SSH public key on the token owner's account. API requests signed with the corresponding private key authenticate as that account through HTTP Signature without API token scope information, causing route-level token scope checks to be skipped. This converts a user-scoped token into an unscoped API authentication method while retaining the account's normal role and repository permissions.Show less

Gitea's Actions workflow status badge endpoint does not enforce repository-read scope or the public-only restriction on the token authenticating the request. A token lacking read:repository, or restricted to public repositories, can retrieve the latest workflow status of a private repository accessible to its owner. This discloses private workflow status beyond the token's intended delegated permissions.Show less

Gitea's pull request review notifier does not attach the pull request to the Actions notification, so the fork workflow approval gate does not recognize the run as originating from a fork. Review comment and review approval or rejection events can consequently load workflow code from the fork head and run it on the base repository's runners without the required maintainer approval. This allows execution of fork-controlled workflow code across the intended approval boundary.Show less

Gitea's shared comparison helper omits the token repository-access check used when updating pull requests. A public-only token with read:repository scope can route a comparison or pull request creation through a public base repository and retrieve commit history and diffs from a private head repository accessible to the token owner. This bypasses the token's public-only restriction; it does not remove the account's underlying repository permission checks.Show less

Gitea's repository migration API accepts a public-only token when the request specifies creation of a private repository. A delegated token intended to operate only on public resources can create a private repository and migration task under the authorizing account or an organization where that user has the necessary permissions. The ordinary private repository-creation route rejects the same token, but the migration path omits that restriction.Show less

Gitea's organization repository-creation API requires write:organization but omits the write:repository token scope enforced by other repository-creation routes. A personal access token or OAuth application token without repository-write scope can therefore create organization-owned repositories if the authorizing user has permission to do so. This bypasses the token's delegated scope boundary while remaining subject to the user's organization permissions.Show less

Gitea's user organization-list API includes Limited-visibility organizations for authenticated restricted accounts without applying the visibility restriction enforced by the single-organization endpoint. A restricted user can list a known user's public organization memberships and retrieve limited organizations' names, descriptions, and avatars. This exposes organization metadata that should be hidden from the requesting account.Show less

Gitea's repository-side team-link API allows a repository administrator who is not an organization owner to attach organization teams to a repository despite RepoAdminChangeTeamAccess being disabled. The endpoint does not enforce the organization's restriction on repository administrators changing team access. This allows unauthorized changes to which organization teams receive repository access.Show less

VentureDrake Laravel CRM before 2.4.0 contains an incorrect authorization vulnerability in user management that allows authenticated administrators to assign unrestricted roles via Role::find. Attackers with user-management access can assign the Owner role or other teams' roles and delete cross-team users through the unscoped UserIndex delete() method.Show less

An Incorrect Authorization vulnerability in the AuthConfig validation and integration execution runtime in Google Cloud Application Integration versions prior to 2026-08-27 allows an authenticated user to escalate privileges and impersonate a service account in the project. This vulnerability was patched on 27 August 2026, and no customer action is needed.Show less

The YITH WooCommerce Popup WordPress plugin before 1.60.0 does not check the capability of the requesting user before deleting post meta, allowing users with the Contributor role and above to delete arbitrary post meta from any post, including content owned by higher-privileged users.Show less

The WP Data Access WordPress plugin before 5.5.77 does not correctly check authorization on one of its application REST endpoints, verifying only read permission before performing a write, which allows unauthenticated attackers to modify data in an application exposed for anonymous read access even when update actions have been disabled by the administrator.Show less

The Ignition Perspective module does not properly validate session privileges when determining Designer-level access. An authenticated user with access to a Vision project could provide their valid Vision session identifier and gain Designer-level privileges. An attacker could exploit these elevated privileges to execute arbitrary code in the context of the Ignition Gateway process.Show less

Incorrect authorization in Mojo in Google Chrome on on Windows prior to 155.0.8059.79 allowed a local attacker to potentially execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a local program. (Chromium security severity: High)Show less