CVE-2026-63003
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
django CMS is an easy-to-use and developer-friendly enterprise content management system powered by Django. Prior to 5.0.9, page duplication lacks an object-level authorization check on the source page. In cms/admin/forms.py, DuplicatePageForm.source accepts any Page, the AddPageForm constructor does not narrow a hidden source field, AddPageForm.clean does not validate the source against the user, and AddPageForm.save calls from_source. In cms/admin/pageadmin.py, duplicate and PageAdmin.has_add_permission check only whether a staff user may add a page. A crafted source value can therefore copy every placeholder and plugin from an unauthorized page with permissions=False, stripping source view restrictions and exposing content across sites or restricted subtrees when CMS_PERMISSION is enabled. This issue is fixed in versions 5.0.9.
Attack profile
How easy it is to exploit
- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- Low
- User interaction
- None
What an attacker can affect
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
Exploit likelihood
What each source reports
CVE List Score used
6.5
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
django CMS is an easy-to-use and developer-friendly enterprise content management system powered by Django. Prior to 5.0.9, page duplication lacks an object-level authorization check on the source page. In cms/admin/forms.py, DuplicatePageForm.source accepts any Page, the AddPageForm constructor does not narrow a hidden source field, AddPageForm.clean does not validate the source against the user, and AddPageForm.save calls from_source. In cms/admin/pageadmin.py, duplicate and PageAdmin.has_add_permission check only whether a staff user may add a page. A crafted source value can therefore copy every placeholder and plugin from an unauthorized page with permissions=False, stripping source view restrictions and exposing content across sites or restricted subtrees when CMS_PERMISSION is enabled. This issue is fixed in versions 5.0.9.
- Record
CVE-2026-63003- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-639, CWE-862
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-63570
6.5
django CMS is an easy-to-use and developer-friendly enterprise content management system powered by Django. Prior to 5.0.9, page duplication lacks an object-level authorization check on the source page. In cms/admin/forms.py, DuplicatePageForm.source accepts any Page, the AddPageForm constructor does not narrow a hidden source field, AddPageForm.clean does not validate the source against the user, and AddPageForm.save calls from_source. In cms/admin/pageadmin.py, duplicate and PageAdmin.has_add_permission check only whether a staff user may add a page. A crafted source value can therefore copy every placeholder and plugin from an unauthorized page with permissions=False, stripping source view restrictions and exposing content across sites or restricted subtrees when CMS_PERMISSION is enabled. This issue is fixed in versions 5.0.9.
- Record
EUVD-2026-63570- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Updated
- 2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr
6.5
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
Impact
The only authorization gate on the duplicate flow is PageAdmin.has_add_permission,
which checks user_can_add_page(user, site) / user_can_add_subpage(...) — i.e. “may
this user create a page at all”. Nothing checks the user’s relationship to the page being
copied:
cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm.source = ModelChoiceField(queryset=Page.objects.all(), widget=HiddenInput())spans every page in the database, on every site.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.__init__returns early when thesourcewidget is hidden, so the queryset is never narrowed to the user’s site/subtree.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.clean()validates only URL uniqueness;sourceis never validated against the user.cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate()seedssourcefrom the URL only on GET; on POST the value comes entirely from the request body.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.save()→from_source()performssource.copy(..., permissions=False)and copies every placeholder and all plugins ofsourceinto a new page on the attacker’s site. Becausepermissions=Falsedrops the source’s view restrictions, the resulting copy is fully readable by the attacker.
This crosses a real privilege boundary: a staff user restricted (via CMS_PERMISSION) to
their own site or subtree can exfiltrate the content of restricted pages and of pages
belonging to other tenants.
Read-back is trivial (verified): the copy is created on the attacker’s site and, because
copy(..., permissions=False) strips the source’s view restrictions, the new page is
unrestricted. user_can_view_page() then returns True for it (unrestricted +
PUBLIC_FOR), so the attacker — or even an anonymous visitor — can read the duplicated
content directly from the front end. No further permission on the new page is required.
Proof of concept
- Log in as a staff user
attackerwho has add page permission but no view/change permission on a target (secret / other-site) pageSECRET_ID. - Send (the URL
<id>only needs to be aPageContentthe attacker can already see — e.g. one of their own pages; the victim id goes in the POST body):
POST /admin/cms/pagecontent/<MY_OWN_PAGECONTENT_ID>/duplicate/ HTTP/1.1
Cookie: sessionid=<attacker session>
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
csrfmiddlewaretoken=...&title=x&slug=x&language=en&source=<SECRET_ID>
- A new, unrestricted page is created under the attacker’s site containing a verbatim copy of the secret page’s plugins, which the attacker can now preview/edit/read.
Patches
Enforce an object-level permission check on source:
class DuplicatePageForm(AddPageForm):
source = forms.ModelChoiceField(
queryset=Page.objects.all(),
required=True,
widget=forms.HiddenInput(),
)
def clean_source(self):
source = self.cleaned_data.get("source")
if source and not user_can_view_page(self._user, source):
raise ValidationError(_("You do not have permission to copy this page."))
return source
(user_can_view_page is imported from cms.utils.page_permissions.)
Workarounds
Until patched, restrict access to the cms.add_page permission to fully-trusted staff, or
disable the duplicate action for delegated/limited editors.
References
cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate(),has_add_permission(),get_urls()cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm,AddPageForm.__init__/clean/save/from_source- Regression tests:
cms/tests/test_forms.py::DuplicatePageFormSecurityTestCase
- Record
GHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-639, CWE-862
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
NVD
6.5
django CMS is an easy-to-use and developer-friendly enterprise content management system powered by Django. Prior to 5.0.9, page duplication lacks an object-level authorization check on the source page. In cms/admin/forms.py, DuplicatePageForm.source accepts any Page, the AddPageForm constructor does not narrow a hidden source field, AddPageForm.clean does not validate the source against the user, and AddPageForm.save calls from_source. In cms/admin/pageadmin.py, duplicate and PageAdmin.has_add_permission check only whether a staff user may add a page. A crafted source value can therefore copy every placeholder and plugin from an unauthorized page with permissions=False, stripping source view restrictions and exposing content across sites or restricted subtrees when CMS_PERMISSION is enabled. This issue is fixed in versions 5.0.9.
- Record
CVE-2026-63003- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-639, CWE-862
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSV
6.5
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
django CMS is an easy-to-use and developer-friendly enterprise content management system powered by Django. Prior to 5.0.9, page duplication lacks an object-level authorization check on the source page. In cms/admin/forms.py, DuplicatePageForm.source accepts any Page, the AddPageForm constructor does not narrow a hidden source field, AddPageForm.clean does not validate the source against the user, and AddPageForm.save calls from_source. In cms/admin/pageadmin.py, duplicate and PageAdmin.has_add_permission check only whether a staff user may add a page. A crafted source value can therefore copy every placeholder and plugin from an unauthorized page with permissions=False, stripping source view restrictions and exposing content across sites or restricted subtrees when CMS_PERMISSION is enabled. This issue is fixed in versions 5.0.9.
- Record
CVE-2026-63003- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-639, CWE-862
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr
6.5
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
Impact
The only authorization gate on the duplicate flow is PageAdmin.has_add_permission,
which checks user_can_add_page(user, site) / user_can_add_subpage(...) — i.e. “may
this user create a page at all”. Nothing checks the user’s relationship to the page being
copied:
cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm.source = ModelChoiceField(queryset=Page.objects.all(), widget=HiddenInput())spans every page in the database, on every site.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.__init__returns early when thesourcewidget is hidden, so the queryset is never narrowed to the user’s site/subtree.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.clean()validates only URL uniqueness;sourceis never validated against the user.cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate()seedssourcefrom the URL only on GET; on POST the value comes entirely from the request body.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.save()→from_source()performssource.copy(..., permissions=False)and copies every placeholder and all plugins ofsourceinto a new page on the attacker’s site. Becausepermissions=Falsedrops the source’s view restrictions, the resulting copy is fully readable by the attacker.
This crosses a real privilege boundary: a staff user restricted (via CMS_PERMISSION) to
their own site or subtree can exfiltrate the content of restricted pages and of pages
belonging to other tenants.
Read-back is trivial (verified): the copy is created on the attacker’s site and, because
copy(..., permissions=False) strips the source’s view restrictions, the new page is
unrestricted. user_can_view_page() then returns True for it (unrestricted +
PUBLIC_FOR), so the attacker — or even an anonymous visitor — can read the duplicated
content directly from the front end. No further permission on the new page is required.
Proof of concept
- Log in as a staff user
attackerwho has add page permission but no view/change permission on a target (secret / other-site) pageSECRET_ID. - Send (the URL
<id>only needs to be aPageContentthe attacker can already see — e.g. one of their own pages; the victim id goes in the POST body):
POST /admin/cms/pagecontent/<MY_OWN_PAGECONTENT_ID>/duplicate/ HTTP/1.1
Cookie: sessionid=<attacker session>
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
csrfmiddlewaretoken=...&title=x&slug=x&language=en&source=<SECRET_ID>
- A new, unrestricted page is created under the attacker’s site containing a verbatim copy of the secret page’s plugins, which the attacker can now preview/edit/read.
Patches
Enforce an object-level permission check on source:
class DuplicatePageForm(AddPageForm):
source = forms.ModelChoiceField(
queryset=Page.objects.all(),
required=True,
widget=forms.HiddenInput(),
)
def clean_source(self):
source = self.cleaned_data.get("source")
if source and not user_can_view_page(self._user, source):
raise ValidationError(_("You do not have permission to copy this page."))
return source
(user_can_view_page is imported from cms.utils.page_permissions.)
Workarounds
Until patched, restrict access to the cms.add_page permission to fully-trusted staff, or
disable the duplicate action for delegated/limited editors.
References
cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate(),has_add_permission(),get_urls()cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm,AddPageForm.__init__/clean/save/from_source- Regression tests:
cms/tests/test_forms.py::DuplicatePageFormSecurityTestCase
- Record
GHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-639, CWE-862
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVPYSEC-2026-3821
6.5
django CMS: Broken access control in page *Duplicate* allows reading the content of any page (cross-site / restriction bypass)
Impact
The only authorization gate on the duplicate flow is PageAdmin.has_add_permission,
which checks user_can_add_page(user, site) / user_can_add_subpage(...) — i.e. “may
this user create a page at all”. Nothing checks the user’s relationship to the page being
copied:
cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm.source = ModelChoiceField(queryset=Page.objects.all(), widget=HiddenInput())spans every page in the database, on every site.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.__init__returns early when thesourcewidget is hidden, so the queryset is never narrowed to the user’s site/subtree.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.clean()validates only URL uniqueness;sourceis never validated against the user.cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate()seedssourcefrom the URL only on GET; on POST the value comes entirely from the request body.cms/admin/forms.py—AddPageForm.save()→from_source()performssource.copy(..., permissions=False)and copies every placeholder and all plugins ofsourceinto a new page on the attacker’s site. Becausepermissions=Falsedrops the source’s view restrictions, the resulting copy is fully readable by the attacker.
This crosses a real privilege boundary: a staff user restricted (via CMS_PERMISSION) to
their own site or subtree can exfiltrate the content of restricted pages and of pages
belonging to other tenants.
Read-back is trivial (verified): the copy is created on the attacker’s site and, because
copy(..., permissions=False) strips the source’s view restrictions, the new page is
unrestricted. user_can_view_page() then returns True for it (unrestricted +
PUBLIC_FOR), so the attacker — or even an anonymous visitor — can read the duplicated
content directly from the front end. No further permission on the new page is required.
Proof of concept
- Log in as a staff user
attackerwho has add page permission but no view/change permission on a target (secret / other-site) pageSECRET_ID. - Send (the URL
<id>only needs to be aPageContentthe attacker can already see — e.g. one of their own pages; the victim id goes in the POST body):
POST /admin/cms/pagecontent/<MY_OWN_PAGECONTENT_ID>/duplicate/ HTTP/1.1
Cookie: sessionid=<attacker session>
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
csrfmiddlewaretoken=...&title=x&slug=x&language=en&source=<SECRET_ID>
- A new, unrestricted page is created under the attacker’s site containing a verbatim copy of the secret page’s plugins, which the attacker can now preview/edit/read.
Patches
Enforce an object-level permission check on source:
class DuplicatePageForm(AddPageForm):
source = forms.ModelChoiceField(
queryset=Page.objects.all(),
required=True,
widget=forms.HiddenInput(),
)
def clean_source(self):
source = self.cleaned_data.get("source")
if source and not user_can_view_page(self._user, source):
raise ValidationError(_("You do not have permission to copy this page."))
return source
(user_can_view_page is imported from cms.utils.page_permissions.)
Workarounds
Until patched, restrict access to the cms.add_page permission to fully-trusted staff, or
disable the duplicate action for delegated/limited editors.
References
cms/admin/pageadmin.py—duplicate(),has_add_permission(),get_urls()cms/admin/forms.py—DuplicatePageForm,AddPageForm.__init__/clean/save/from_source- Regression tests:
cms/tests/test_forms.py::DuplicatePageFormSecurityTestCase
- Record
PYSEC-2026-3821- CVSS 3.1
- 6.5 Medium
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N - Updated
- 2026-11-02
Affected products
Affected packages
| Package | Affected | Fixed |
|---|---|---|
django-cmsPyPI |
through 5.0.8 | 5.0.9 |
django-cmsPyPI |
before 5.0.9, plus listed versions 2.0.12.0.22.1.12.1.22.1.3 Show 45 moreShow less2.1.42.1.52.22.2.12.3.12.3.22.3.32.3.42.3.52.3.62.3.72.3.82.4.02.4.12.4.22.4.33.03.0.13.0.103.0.113.0.123.0.133.0.143.0.153.0.163.0.173.0.183.0.23.0.33.0.43.0.53.0.63.0.73.0.83.0.93.1.03.1.0.b13.1.0rc13.1.0rc23.1.13.1.23.1.33.1.43.1.53.1.6 |
5.0.9 |
History
| Recorded | Changed | Sources |
|---|---|---|
| first indexed | CVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV |
Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.
In short
CVE-2026-63003 is a medium vulnerability (CVSS 6.5) in Django Cms Association Django-cms, published August 20, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.41%, the 36th percentile. Fixed in django-cms 5.0.9.
References
github.com/django-cms/django-cms/security/advisories/GHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr
github.com/django-cms/django-cms/pull/8713
github.com/django-cms/django-cms/commit/3e1ccf7573eb1a74ebbbfaaa812c1f5cadf14e6c
github.com/django-cms/django-cms/releases/tag/5.0.9
github.com/advisories/GHSA-6x92-6vx4-5fwr
github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/63xxx/CVE-2026-63003.json
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-63003
github.com/django-cms/django-cms
pypi.org/project/django-cms
Left out here: 91 versions. The JSON record has them.