CVE-2025-26138
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 · uneditedSystemic Risk Value <=2.8.0 is vulnerable to improper access control in /RiskValue/GroupingEntities/Controls/GetFile.aspx?ID=. Uploaded files are accessible via a predictable numerical ID parameter, allowing unauthorized users to increment or decrement the ID to access and download files they do not have permission to view.
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 · high confidenceSystemic Risk Value <=2.8.0 contains an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in the GetFile.aspx endpoint. The application uses predictable sequential numeric IDs to reference uploaded files without verifying user authorization, allowing authenticated users to enumerate IDs and access files belonging to other users.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data<= 2.8.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed version of Systemic Rm Risk ValueCheck the application installation directory, About page, or assembly metadata for the exact version number. Compare against the affected range: any version <= 2.8.0 is vulnerable.Affected if The installed version is 2.8.0 or lower.
-
Locate the GetFile.aspx endpointCheck if the file GetFile.aspx exists in the web application root or accessible paths. This is typically found in the web application's public directories.Affected if The GetFile.aspx file is present in the application.
-
Verify sequential numeric ID usage in file referencesUpload a file through the application and observe how the file is referenced in the URL or API response. Look for patterns like ?id=1, ?fileId=123, or similar numeric parameters.Affected if File references use predictable sequential integers (e.g., 1, 2, 3) rather than GUIDs or random tokens.
-
Test for missing authorization on file accessUsing an authenticated account, access a file belonging to a different user by modifying the numeric ID parameter in the GetFile.aspx URL. Check if the file is returned without authorization errors.Affected if The application returns files from other users when the numeric ID is changed, indicating no ownership verification.
You are affected if Systemic Rm Risk Value version 2.8.0 or lower is installed and the GetFile.aspx endpoint uses sequential numeric IDs without verifying that the requesting user owns the file.
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 to verify the requesting user has permission to access each specific file before serving it, and replace sequential IDs with non-predictable identifiers (e.g., GUIDs) to prevent enumeration.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-26138 — 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-2025-26138 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