CVE-2025-31791
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 Oliver Boyers Pin Generator pin-generator allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Pin Generator: from n/a through <= 2.0.0.
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 confidenceMissing authorization vulnerability in Pin Generator allows attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. Users can access functionality or data beyond their intended permission level due to missing or improper authorization checks on certain endpoints or operations.
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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Pin Generator installationSearch for Pin Generator application files, services, or packages on the system. Check common installation directories, application lists, or running services.Affected if Pin Generator software is installed on the system
-
Locate configuration filesFind configuration files for Pin Generator (typically in config/, settings/, or application root directories). Look for files named config.json, settings.yaml, application.properties, or similar.Affected if Configuration files exist and contain security-related settings
-
Check authorization settingsInspect configuration files for authorization, access control, or permission settings. Look for fields related to roles, permissions, security levels, or access control lists.Affected if Authorization settings are missing, set to permissive values (e.g., allow-all), or contain no role-based access control configuration
-
Review endpoint definitionsExamine API endpoint definitions, route configurations, or service definitions for sensitive operations (e.g., PIN generation, PIN modification, user management). Identify which endpoints lack permission checks.Affected if Sensitive endpoints exist without defined authorization requirements or with improper access control
-
Test access control enforcementAttempt to access higher-privilege endpoints or operations with a lower-privilege account. Compare actual behavior against expected role-based restrictions.Affected if Lower-privilege users can access functionality or data intended for higher-privilege users
A user is affected if Pin Generator is installed and sensitive endpoints or operations lack proper authorization enforcement, allowing unauthorized access beyond the user's intended permission level.
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 role-based or level-based authorization checks on all sensitive endpoints and operations, ensuring users can only access resources appropriate to their security level.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31791 — 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-2025-31791 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