CVE-2025-49651
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 in Lablup's BackendAI allows attackers to takeover all active sessions; Accessing, stealing, or altering any data accessible in the session. This vulnerability exists in all current versions of BackendAI.
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 check in BackendAI allows unauthenticated or unauthorized attackers to hijack all active sessions, enabling them to access, steal, or alter any data within those sessions.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Confirm BackendAI installationIdentify if BackendAI is deployed in your environment by checking for the backendai process, service, or container. Common locations include /opt/backendai or check running services with 'systemctl list-units | grep backendai' or 'docker ps | grep backendai'.Affected if BackendAI is installed and running in your environment
-
Identify BackendAI versionCheck the installed version of BackendAI. Common methods include: 'pip show backendai', checking a VERSION file in the installation directory, or checking the docker image tag if running containers.Affected if The installed version is any version of BackendAI prior to when the authorization fix was applied (version comparison against the fixed release needed)
-
Inspect session management configurationLocate and review BackendAI's session management configuration files. Check for session-related settings in the main config file (typically backendai.yaml or config.toml) and look for any authorization/permission settings related to session access or manipulation.Affected if Session authorization settings are missing, set to permissive values, or allow unauthenticated access
-
Verify session API endpoints authorizationReview BackendAI's API endpoint definitions for session-related operations (session list, session access, session termination). Check the source code or API documentation for authorization decorators or permission checks on these endpoints.Affected if Session management API endpoints lack proper authorization checks or permit access without authentication
-
Test session hijack vulnerabilityIf you have a test environment, attempt to access an active session using a request without valid authentication credentials or with an unauthorized user token. Observe if the system rejects the request or allows access to session data.Affected if Unauthenticated or unauthorized requests successfully access or manipulate active sessions
Your environment is affected if BackendAI is installed and the session management lacks proper authorization enforcement, allowing unauthenticated or unauthorized access to active sessions.
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 for all session management operations and validate user permissions before allowing session access or manipulation.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49651 — 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-2025-49651 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