Skip to content

Grav: Incomplete callable validation in blueprint dynamic fields allows arbitrary static method invocation and file disclosure

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jul 21, 2026 in getgrav/grav • Updated Sep 17, 2026

Package

composer getgrav/grav (Composer)

Affected versions

>= 2.0.7, <= 2.0.10

Patched versions

2.0.11

Description

Summary

Grav CMS's blueprint dynamic-field callable guard can be bypassed with a fully-qualified Class::method string, letting an account with only page-editing rights (admin.pages, not super-admin) plant a directive in a page's form-field frontmatter that invokes an arbitrary public static PHP method with attacker-controlled arguments. Using built-in gadget methods this yields, at minimum, arbitrary reading of any server-readable file (disclosed to anonymous visitors of the crafted page) and arbitrary creation/copying of files and directories under the web-server account.

Details

Blueprint::isSafeDynamicCall() (system/src/Grav/Common/Data/Blueprint.php, method around line 488) is meant to block dangerous callables named in a blueprint's dynamic-field directives (data-*@). It only consults its dangerous-name denylist when the callable string does not contain :::

if (is_string($function) && !str_contains($function, '::') && Utils::isDangerousFunction($function)) {
    return false;
}

Any callable string containing :: — i.e. every Class::method static call — skips the check entirely and is passed to call_user_func_array() at Blueprint::dynamicData() (Blueprint.php, around line 461) and FlexDirectory::dynamicDataField() (system/src/Grav/Framework/Flex/FlexDirectory.php, around line 937). There is no allowlist restricting which classes or methods may be invoked this way; only the call's arguments are (separately) scanned for smuggled dangerous callables, never the target itself.

Utils::isDangerousFunction() (system/src/Grav/Common/Utils.php) classifies any string containing a colon (str_contains($name, ":")) or a namespace backslash as dangerous — so a qualified Class::method string would be rejected if it ever reached this function. The !str_contains($function, '::') condition in isSafeDynamicCall() ensures it never does, which is what leaves qualified static calls entirely unscreened. (Whether the exemption was intended to admit legitimate Class::method option-providers is a plausible reading of the surrounding code, but the intent is not established here.)

This is an incomplete fix of two recently published advisories — one addressing page editors executing hidden callables via form-field settings, the other extending the same guard to Flex directories. The guard those fixes introduced never covered qualified static calls. Grav's own permission model separates page-content code execution into a distinct, higher privilege (admin.pages_twig) from plain page editing (admin.pages), so invoking arbitrary methods from an admin.pages-authored page is a genuine trust-boundary bypass, not editor capability by design.

PoC

Tested on Grav develop at commit db8c1fc (which self-reports version 2.0.11) with the admin and form plugins, using an account granted only admin.login + admin.pages (page editor, not super-admin). The same guard is present in every current release from 2.0.7 through 2.0.10. Base URL shown as https://grav.example.

A. Arbitrary file read (confidentiality)

  1. Log in to /admin as the page-editor account (GET /admin for the login nonce, then POST task=login).
  2. Save a page via the standard admin endpoint, POST /admin/pages/<route> with the session cookie, the admin nonce, and data[frontmatter] containing a form field with a download gadget directive:
    forms:
      x:
        fields:
          y:
            type: text
            data-opts@:
              - 'Grav\Common\Utils::download'
              - '/etc/passwd'
              - false
              - 0
              - 1024
              - mime: 'text/plain'
    The server returns HTTP 200 and accepts the save — the data-opts@ directive is not rejected.
  3. As an unauthenticated visitor (no cookies), request the saved page, e.g. GET /<route> (use a fresh query string to avoid a cached copy; immediately after saving, a first request may 404 while the flat-file page index catches up — retry moments later). The response is HTTP 200 with the raw contents of /etc/passwd in the body (root:x:0:0:...). Pointing the path at user/accounts/<name>.yaml instead returns that account file, including its hashed_password: bcrypt line — i.e. an anonymous visitor obtains a stored administrator's password hash.

B. Arbitrary file/directory write (integrity) — verified

Using the same mechanism with Grav\Common\Filesystem\Folder::copy (a public static method taking source and destination paths), a page editor caused the server to copy an existing page directory to an attacker-chosen new path under user/pages/; the newly created page then rendered its (attacker-controlled) content at the new route over plain HTTP. This demonstrates attacker-controlled creation of files/directories anywhere the web-server account can write. Folder::move and Folder::delete are equally reachable (their destructive nature was not exercised).

Impact

A page editor (an admin.pages-only account, not super-admin) can, through a page they author:

  • Read any server-readable file, disclosed to any anonymous, unauthenticated visitor of the crafted page — including user/accounts/*.yaml, which stores account metadata and bcrypt password hashes. An attacker may attempt offline cracking of a disclosed hash; recovery of a weak or reused administrator password could lead to full admin-panel compromise. Other secrets on disk (site/plugin config, environment files) are equally exposed.
  • Create or overwrite files and directories under the web-server account (demonstrated via Folder::copy), with Folder::move/Folder::delete additionally reachable for destructive tampering.

Because the guard permits any public static method, the reachable impact is bounded only by the gadget surface of the loaded codebase, not by this report's demonstrated cases.

References

@rhukster rhukster published to getgrav/grav Jul 21, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 17, 2026
Reviewed Sep 17, 2026
Last updated Sep 17, 2026

Severity

High

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
High
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:H/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.
(21st percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Learn more on MITRE.

Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information. Learn more on MITRE.

Use of Externally-Controlled Input to Select Classes or Code ('Unsafe Reflection')

The product uses external input with reflection to select which classes or code to use, but it does not sufficiently prevent the input from selecting improper classes or code. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-69088

GHSA ID

GHSA-7pgq-cr25-xvc8

Source code

Credits

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