CVE-2023-48779
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedMissing Authorization vulnerability in 3DWeb 360 Javascript Viewer 360deg-javascript-viewer allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects 360 Javascript Viewer: from n/a through <= 1.7.11.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThe 3DWeb 360 Javascript Viewer versions up to 1.7.11 contains a missing authorization vulnerability that allows attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. This appears to be an access control bypass where the viewer fails to properly enforce authorization checks, potentially allowing unauthorized access to viewing functionality or data.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed viewer versionLocate the main viewer JavaScript file (typically named '3dwebviewer.js', 'viewer.js', or similar) and check for a version string in the file header, or look for a package.json, version.txt, or VERSION file in the viewer deployment directoryAffected if The installed version is 1.7.11 or lower (any version up to and including 1.7.11)
-
Verify access control configurationExamine the viewer's configuration file (commonly config.js, viewer-config.json, or settings.js) for any security level, permission, or authorization settings. Look for fields like 'accessLevel', 'authorization', 'requireAuth', or 'securityLevel'Affected if Authorization or access control settings are missing, set to 'none', 'public', or are not explicitly defined in the configuration
-
Check if the viewer endpoint is publicly accessibleAttempt to access the viewer URL from an unauthenticated network perspective, or review web server access logs and firewall rules to determine if the viewer endpoints are exposed to unauthenticated usersAffected if The viewer is accessible without authentication from untrusted network locations
-
Inspect for missing permission checks in viewer APIReview the viewer JavaScript source code for API endpoint calls (such as loadModel, getScene, or data endpoints) and verify if these calls include proper authorization tokens or session validationAffected if API calls do not include authorization headers, tokens, or session validation before returning data or allowing access to 360 content
A user is affected if the installed 3DWeb 360 Javascript Viewer version is 1.7.11 or lower AND the viewer lacks proper authorization checks or is configured with weak/missing access controls.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement proper authorization checks throughout the 360 Javascript Viewer application to verify user permissions before granting access to protected resources or functionality.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-48779 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-48779 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data