CVE-2025-48941
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 · uneditedMyBB is free and open source forum software. Prior to version 1.8.39, the search component does not validate permissions correctly, which allows attackers to determine the existence of hidden (draft, unapproved, or soft-deleted) threads containing specified text in the title. The visibility state (`mybb_threads.visible` integer column) of threads is not validated in internal search queries, whose result is used to output a general success or failure of the search. While MyBB validates permissions when displaying the final search results, a search operation that internally produces at least one result outputs a redirect response (as a HTTP redirect, or a success message page with delayed redirect, depending on configuration). On the other hand, a search operation that internally produces no results outputs a corresponding message in the response without a redirect. This allows a user to determine whether threads matching title search parameters exist, including draft threads (`visible` with a value of `-2`), soft-deleted threads (`visible` with a value of `-1`), and unapproved threads (`visible` with a value of `0`); in addition to displaying generally visible threads (`visible` with a value of `1`). This vulnerability does not affect other layers of permissions. In order to exploit the vulnerability, the user must have access to the search functionality, and general access to forums containing the thread(s). The vulnerability does not expose the message content of posts. MyBB 1.8.39 resolves this issue.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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< 1.8.39CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
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.
dbcve · scoped1.8.39
MyBB 1.8.39
- 1. Backup your current MyBB installation and database
- 2. Download MyBB 1.8.39 from the official MyBB website (https://www.mybb.com/downloads/)
- 3. Upload the new files from the 1.8.39 package, overwriting the existing installation
- 4. Run the upgrade script by accessing your forum's URL (e.g., https://yourforum.com/install/upgrade.php)
- 5. Follow the on-screen upgrade instructions to complete the process
- 6. Clear any caches (admin dashboard > Tools & Maintenance > Cache Manager)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-48941 — 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-2025-48941 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