Skip to content

django CMS: Clipboard copy IDOR discloses unauthorized plugin content

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 12, 2026 in django-cms/django-cms • Updated Aug 20, 2026

Package

pip django-cms (pip)

Affected versions

< 5.0.8

Patched versions

5.0.8

Description

Summary

The clipboard copy paths of the copy_plugins admin endpoint validate only the target (the user's own clipboard) and skip source-side authorization. A staff user can copy plugins out of a placeholder they have no permission on into their clipboard, then read the (secret) content.

Details

In cms/admin/placeholderadmin.py, _copy_plugin_to_clipboard and _copy_placeholder_to_clipboard check has_copy_plugins_permission, which only evaluates request.toolbar.clipboard.has_add_plugins_permission(...) — the
clipboard belongs to the requesting user, and check_source is likewise applied only to the clipboard. The source placeholder identified by the attacker-supplied source_placeholder_id / source_plugin_id is never authorization-checked. (The placeholder-to-placeholder copy path, has_copy_from_placeholder_permission, correctly checks both sides.)

Impact

A staff user holding the global add permission for a plugin type, but with no access to a given placeholder/page, can copy that placeholder's plugins into their own clipboard and read content (e.g. link names/URLs, text) they cannot reach through the normal edit endpoints.

Requires CMS_PERMISSION=True with per-placeholder/page restrictions.

Patches

Fixed in 5.0.8: the clipboard copy paths now also verify source-side permission (has_add_plugins_permission + check_source on the source placeholder), matching placeholder-to-placeholder copy.

Workarounds

None. Upgrade is recommended.

Credits

Reported by the security team at the University of Sydney ([@reporter]).

References

@fsbraun fsbraun published to django-cms/django-cms Jun 12, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Aug 20, 2026
Reviewed Aug 20, 2026
Last updated Aug 20, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(15th percentile)

Weaknesses

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-54622

GHSA ID

GHSA-4xfr-4p46-gc6p

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.