CVE-2026-108951 in LavaLite
Summary
by MITRE • 10/12/2026
LavaLite CMS through 10.1.2 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability that allows authenticated low-privileged users to modify other users' accounts by abusing the AbstractRequest isWorkflow() check. Attackers can send a PATCH request to the user update route with a target identifier to change name, email, password, status, or mobile, including for administrators.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/12/2026
The vulnerability identified in LavaLite CMS versions through 10.1.2 represents a critical authorization bypass that undermines the fundamental principle of least privilege within the application's access control mechanisms. This flaw specifically targets the authentication and authorization logic governing user account modifications. While the system correctly requires users to be authenticated before performing actions, it fails to adequately verify whether an authenticated low-privileged user has the specific permission required to modify another user's profile data. The core of this issue lies in the improper implementation of workflow checks within the AbstractRequest class, particularly regarding the isWorkflow() method which was intended to enforce additional validation steps for certain operations but was bypassed or misconfigured in a way that allowed unauthorized state changes.
Technically, the vulnerability exploits how the application handles HTTP PATCH requests directed at user update endpoints. When an attacker sends a request with a target identifier corresponding to another user account, including high-privilege accounts such as administrators, the backend logic fails to cross-reference the requester's role against the permissions required for modifying that specific resource. The isWorkflow() check, which should have acted as a gatekeeper to ensure proper authorization workflows were followed, does not effectively restrict access based on the target user's identity or privilege level. Consequently, an attacker can manipulate fields such as name, email address, password, account status, and mobile number for any other user in the system without needing elevated privileges themselves. This indicates a flaw in both object-level authorization checks and potentially in how workflow states are evaluated during request processing.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe due to its potential for privilege escalation and complete compromise of administrative functions. By altering an administrator's password, an attacker can gain full control over the CMS environment, leading to unauthorized content manipulation, data exfiltration, or further exploitation of other system components. Additionally, changing account statuses could lock out legitimate administrators or grant access to malicious actors under false identities. The ability to modify email addresses and mobile numbers also facilitates phishing attacks or account takeover scenarios by redirecting password reset links or verification codes to attacker-controlled channels. This level of control effectively neutralizes the security boundaries established for low-privileged users, allowing them to act as system administrators with minimal effort and no specialized tools beyond standard web request capabilities.
From a classification perspective, this vulnerability aligns closely with CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management, specifically where an actor is able to perform actions that exceed their assigned privileges due to flawed access control logic. It also relates to CWE-862 Missing Authorization, as the application fails to enforce proper checks before allowing users to modify resources they do not own or have permission to edit. In terms of offensive security frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK, this behavior is consistent with T1078 Valid Accounts and potentially T1098 Account Manipulation, where attackers leverage existing credentials to maintain persistence or escalate privileges by altering account properties. The exploitation vector typically involves web-based interactions, fitting the profile of remote code execution prerequisites through configuration changes rather than direct software injection.
Mitigation strategies must focus on implementing robust object-level authorization checks that verify not only user authentication but also explicit permission grants for modifying specific resources based on ownership or role hierarchy. Developers should ensure that the isWorkflow() method and similar validation routines are rigorously tested to prevent bypasses through parameter manipulation or logic errors. Input validation alone is insufficient; strict access control lists must be enforced at every step of the request lifecycle, particularly when handling PATCH requests for sensitive user data. Upgrading to a patched version of LavaLite CMS that addresses this authorization flaw is essential. In the interim, network-level controls such as Web Application Firewalls can help detect and block anomalous patterns of account modification attempts by low-privileged users targeting high-privilege accounts, although these are secondary measures compared to fixing the underlying code logic.