CVE-2025-49349
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 Reuters News Agency Reuters Direct reuters-direct allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Reuters Direct: from n/a through <= 3.0.0.
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 (Broken Access Control) vulnerability in Reuters Direct allows attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. This permits unauthorized users to access functionality or resources beyond their intended permissions, likely due to missing or insufficient 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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 Reuters Direct installation and versionLocate the Reuters Direct installation directory and check for version information in product metadata, about pages, or configuration filesAffected if The installed version falls within an affected version range (if known) or is an unpatched version lacking the authorization fix
-
Enumerate accessible endpointsReview the application URL structure and identify endpoints related to sensitive operations such as admin functions, data exports, user management, or content modificationAffected if Endpoints handling sensitive operations are exposed without documented authentication requirements
-
Test authorization enforcement on sensitive endpointsAttempt to access identified sensitive endpoints with a low-privilege or unauthenticated account, observing whether the system returns expected access-denied responses or permits unauthorized accessAffected if The application returns success responses or displays sensitive data without rejecting the unauthorized request
-
Verify role-based access control configurationCheck application configuration files, database role mappings, or access control settings to confirm that RBAC policies are defined and enforced for sensitive operationsAffected if No RBAC policies exist, policies are misconfigured, or authorization checks are absent from sensitive operation handlers
-
Inspect API and backend service communicationsReview API documentation, service logs, or network traffic to determine if backend services validate authorization tokens or session permissions for sensitive requestsAffected if Backend services accept requests without validating user authorization credentials
Your environment is affected if Reuters Direct is running without proper authorization checks enforced on sensitive endpoints, allowing unauthenticated or low-privilege users to access restricted functionality.
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 validation on all sensitive endpoints and enforce role-based access control (RBAC) consistent with the principle of least privilege.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49349 — 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-2025-49349 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