CVE-2026-15920
published 2026-08-04CVE-2026-15920: An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8. `django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as…
PriorityP429medium6.1CVSS 3.1
AVNACLPRNUIRSCCLILAN
EPSS
0.39%
32.7th percentile
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input.
Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.
Affected
34 ranges· showing 25
| Vendor | Product | Version range | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | eda-controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | hub-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-24 | lightspeed-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | eda-controller-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | gateway-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | hub-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-25 | lightspeed-rhel8 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | eda-controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | gateway-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | hub-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-26 | lightspeed-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | aap-cloud-billing-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | ansible-dev-tools-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | eda-controller-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | gateway-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | hub-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | lightspeed-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-27 | metrics-service-rhel9 | — | — |
| ansible-automation-platform-tech-preview | metrics-service-rhel9 | — | — |
CVSS provenance
nvdv3.16.1MEDIUMCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
nvdv4.05.1MEDIUMCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
vendor_redhat6.1MEDIUM
Stop checking back — get the weekly exploitation signal.
Every Monday: what got weaponized or added to CISA KEV in the last seven days — each CVE cross-linked to its PoC, Nuclei template, and detection rule. Free, one email a week, unsubscribe in one click.
GHSA
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
ghsa_unreviewed·2026-08-04
CVE-2026-15920 [MEDIUM] CWE-83 An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untrusted input.
Django would like to thank Egor Saltykov for reporting this issue.
Red Hat
django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
vendor_redhat·2026-08-04·CVSS 6.1
CVE-2026-15920 [MEDIUM] CWE-79 django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk import of untr
No detection rules found.
No public exploits indexed.
Hackernews
⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
blogs_hackernews·2026-08-31
CVE-2026-81578 ⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
Home
Threat Intelligence
Vulnerabilities
Cyber Attacks
Webinars
Expert Insights
Awards
Webinars
Awards
Free eBooks
About THN
Jobs
Advertise with us
## ⚡ Weekly Recap: Chinese Spy Proxy, AI Agents Go Off-Task, Router Backdoors and More
The boring parts caused most of the trouble.
A router shipped ready to listen. A fake check turned the user into the installer. Trusted systems collected traffic and passwords, then cleaned the logs. Old bugs formed new attack chains. Even an AI agent decided its assigned task was optional.
Elsewhere, fake apps, helpful support calls, cheap banking kits, exposed systems, and weak defaults kept things moving. Different attacks, same useful mistake: something familiar was trusted without a second look.
Here is the week...
## ⚡ Threat of the
Hackernews
Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
blogs_hackernews·2026-08-05·CVSS 9.5
CVE-2026-58073 [CRITICAL] Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
Home
Threat Intelligence
Vulnerabilities
Cyber Attacks
Webinars
Expert Insights
Awards
Webinars
Awards
Free eBooks
About THN
Jobs
Advertise with us
## Veeam, Terraform MCP, Django Patch Critical Flaws, Led by CVSS 10.0 Cross-Tenant Bug
HashiCorp, Veeam, and the Django Software Foundation have patched 11 vulnerabilities across Terraform MCP Server, Veeam Service Provider Console, and Django.
The three most serious:
An unauthenticated flaw in Veeam's console that hands over a managed agent's credentials, rated 9.5
A cross-tenant flaw in HashiCorp's MCP server that lets one user's Terraform token be reused for later users' requests, scored a maximum 10.0 on its CVE record
A flaw in GeoDjango's spatial lookups that can write a file to disk and, on some setups, run code, rea
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-15920 python-django5: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
bugzilla·2026-08-09·CVSS 6.1
CVE-2026-15920 [MEDIUM] CVE-2026-15920 python-django5: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
CVE-2026-15920 python-django5: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the datab
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-15920 python-django6: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
bugzilla·2026-08-09·CVSS 6.1
CVE-2026-15920 [MEDIUM] CVE-2026-15920 python-django6: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
CVE-2026-15920 python-django6: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin [fedora-all]
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the datab
Bugzilla
CVE-2026-15920 django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
bugzilla·2026-08-04·CVSS 6.1
CVE-2026-15920 [MEDIUM] CVE-2026-15920 django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
CVE-2026-15920 django: Django: Cross-site scripting via unvalidated URLField values in the admin
An issue was discovered in Django 5.2 before 5.2.17 and 6.0 before 6.0.8.
`django.contrib.admin.utils.display_for_field()` renders `URLField` values as clickable links in the admin without validating the URL. A value stored with an unsafe scheme is displayed as a link on changelist and read-only admin pages, which allows cross-site scripting against staff users who click the link.
Exploitation requires the unsafe value to already be stored in the database. `URLField` validation through a `ModelForm` or the admin rejects unsafe schemes, so this affects applications that persist `URLField` data without running model validation, for example through direct queryset writes, deserialization, or bulk
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/security/https://github.com/django/django/commit/13debb622a32720bda1bccda7622fd14fbf3931bhttps://github.com/django/django/commit/47511a21026cdd721d8fbf8571cc079bc38bb46dhttps://github.com/django/django/commit/5a260d309a4c8010c2ebda24eb758a5d95e2508ahttps://github.com/django/django/commit/b9adb81339cc418f8f56b1050cca6dfec3ab6349https://groups.google.com/g/django-announcehttps://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2026/aug/04/security-releases/
2026-08-04
Published