CVE Tools

CVE-2026-100669

Grav before 2.0.25 Sensitive File Disclosure via Case-Variation Bypass

No known exploitation. No EPSS score yet. No fix published yet.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD

What to do

No fixed build or workaround is published yet. Limit exposure and watch for a patch.

What it is

From the CVE record

Grav before 2.0.25 ships web server configuration samples whose access-control deny rules are matched case-sensitively. In webserver-configs/web.config (IIS), every deny rule (user_sensitive_folders, user_accounts, user_data, user_error_redirect, user_pages, system, vendor, ignore_folders) sets ignoreCase="false" on its URL Rewrite <match> element, overriding the IIS default of ignoreCase="true"; because these are rewrite matches rather than <requestFiltering> elements, there is no case-insensitive fallback. On IIS running over case-insensitive NTFS, an unauthenticated remote attacker can vary the case of a folder name or file extension (for example GET /user/CONFIG/system.YAML) so that no deny rule matches and the IIS static file handler resolves and returns the underlying file, disclosing sensitive data such as configuration secrets or account password hashes. Whether a bypassed file is actually returned depends on MIME registration: .json is served by default, while .yaml/.yml return HTTP 404.3 on a stock IIS unless a YAML MIME mapping has been added. The same class of gap exists in the bundled webserver-configs/lighttpd.conf, whose user/(config|env), directory, script-extension, root-file and dotfile rules lack the (?i) modifier, though it is lower risk because lighttpd typically runs on case-sensitive filesystems. Deployments served by Apache (.htaccess), nginx, Caddy, or the PHP built-in server are not affected. The issue is fixed in 2.0.25; because the .htaccess installer heal does not touch web.config or lighttpd.conf, operators must re-copy the corrected sample files after upgrading.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

No EPSS score yet. New CVEs are usually scored within a few days.

Lifecycle

3 events over 0 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Publishedweakness classified, record updated

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Scored 7.5 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity LowNo special conditions — the attack can be reliably reproduced
  • Privileges Required NoneNo authentication required — anyone can exploit this
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
  • Integrity NoneNo integrity impact
  • Availability NoneNo availability impact

Weaknesses

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Grav, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store