Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2024-48955

HIGH · 8.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-10-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
87/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
Broken access control in NetAdmin 4.030319 returns data with functionalities on the endpoint that "assembles" the functionalities menus, the return of this call is not encrypted and as the system does not validate the session authorization, an attacker can copy the content of the browser of a user with greater privileges having access to the functionalities of the user that the code was copied.

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 confidence

NetAdmin 4.030319 contains a broken access control vulnerability where the endpoint that assembles functionality menus returns unencrypted data without validating session authorization. An authenticated attacker can copy browser content from a higher-privilege user to gain access to that user's privileged functionalities.

MitigationImplement proper session authorization validation on the menu assembly endpoint and enforce role-based access controls to ensure users can only access functionalities appropriate to their privilege level.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

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

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify NetAdmin version
    Locate the NetAdmin installation and check the version number (typically visible in the application header, About page, or installation directory metadata). Compare against the affected version 4.030319.
    Affected if NetAdmin version 4.030319 is installed.
  2. Verify menu assembly endpoint exists
    Locate the web endpoint responsible for assembling functionality menus. This is typically found in the application's menu or navigation module. Without authentication credentials, attempt to access this endpoint via browser or HTTP tool.
    Affected if The menu assembly endpoint returns any data without requiring authentication.
  3. Check for session authorization validation
    Make an authenticated request to the menu endpoint using a low-privilege user's session token. Observe whether the endpoint returns menu items or functionalities that should be restricted to higher-privilege users.
    Affected if The endpoint returns privileged functionality data to a lower-privilege session without authorization validation.
  4. Inspect response for unencrypted menu data
    Capture and examine the raw HTTP response from the menu assembly endpoint. Check whether sensitive menu configurations, role-based options, or privileged functions are exposed in plaintext.
    Affected if The response contains unencrypted menu data including higher-privilege functionalities that the requesting user should not access.

A user is affected if NetAdmin version 4.030319 is running and the menu assembly endpoint returns privileged functionality data without validating the session's authorization level.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement proper session authorization validation on the menu assembly endpoint and enforce role-based access controls to ensure users can only access functionalities appropriate to their privilege level.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-48955 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-48955 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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