CVE-2025-61113
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 · uneditedTalkTalk 3.3.6 Android App contains improper access control vulnerabilities in multiple API endpoints. By modifying request parameters, attackers may obtain sensitive user information (such as device identifiers and birthdays) and access private group information, including join credentials. Successful exploitation may result in privacy breaches and unauthorized access to restricted resources.
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 confidenceThe TalkTalk Android app version 3.3.6 contains improper access control vulnerabilities in multiple API endpoints. Attackers can exploit these vulnerabilities by modifying request parameters to access sensitive user information (device identifiers, birthdays) and private group data including join credentials without proper authorization. This represents classic broken access control (likely IDOR) where the application fails to validate that the requesting user has permission to access the requested resources.
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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 if TalkTalk Android app is installedCheck device application list or use ADB command: 'adb shell pm list packages | grep talktalk' to list installed packagesAffected if The TalkTalk app package is found on the device
-
Verify installed app versionUse ADB: 'adb shell dumpsys package com.talktalk.android | grep versionName' or check app info in device Settings > Apps > TalkTalkAffected if Version is 3.3.6 or lower (any version below current patched release)
-
Confirm API endpoint access (requires authorization/sandbox testing)If you are testing your own app deployment or have authorized access, intercept API traffic using a proxy and attempt to access user data endpoints with modified user identifiersAffected if API requests return sensitive data (device identifiers, birthdays, group credentials) when requesting other users' resources without proper authorization headers
-
Check for exposed sensitive data in API responsesReview API responses from the app for presence of fields like device identifiers, birthdates, or private group join credentials that should not be accessibleAffected if API responses contain data belonging to other users or unauthorized sensitive fields
You are affected if the TalkTalk Android app version 3.3.6 or lower is installed and API endpoints allow unauthorized access to other users' sensitive information without proper authorization validation.
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 robust authorization checks on all API endpoints to verify user permissions before returning any data, and validate that users can only access resources they own or are explicitly authorized to view.
- 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-2025-61113 — 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-2025-61113 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