Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2025-61114

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-30
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
2nd Line Android App version v1.2.92 and before (package name com.mysecondline.app), developed by AutoBizLine, Inc., contains an improper access control vulnerability in its authentication mechanism. The server only validates the first character of the user_token, enabling attackers to brute force tokens and perform unauthorized queries on other user accounts. Successful exploitation could result in privacy breaches and unauthorized access to user data.

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 · high confidence

The 2nd Line Android App's server-side authentication validates only the first character of the user_token, allowing attackers to brute force tokens by systematically testing character combinations. This enables unauthorized access to other user accounts and their data through the authentication mechanism.

MitigationFix the server-side token validation to properly validate the entire user_token string, implement rate limiting on authentication endpoints, and consider additional security measures like account lockout policies.

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if you run the 2nd Line server component
    Review your infrastructure to determine if you host or operate a 2nd Line Android App server instance. Check for services handling user authentication for this application.
    Affected if You operate or host a 2nd Line server that handles authentication for the Android app.
  2. Determine your installed version
    Check the server application version through its about page, package metadata, or command line interface (e.g., --version, -v). Compare your version against any publicly released versions of the 2nd Line server software.
    Affected if Your version is older than the fixed version (if known) or you cannot confirm you have the fix.
  3. Review the token validation logic
    Examine the server-side authentication code that processes the user_token parameter. Specifically inspect how the token string is validated, whether it checks the full token or only a prefix (e.g., token[0] or similar substring logic).
    Affected if The code validates only the first character or a prefix of the token rather than the complete token string.
  4. Test authentication behavior
    Send authentication requests with the same first character but different full tokens (e.g., token 'A123' vs 'A456'). Observe if both requests are accepted when only the first character matches a valid token.
    Affected if Authentication succeeds for different tokens that share only the same first character.
  5. Check for rate limiting on auth endpoints
    Inspect your web server, API gateway, or application configuration for rate limiting rules on authentication endpoints (login, token validation). Look for request throttling or lockout configurations.
    Affected if No rate limiting or brute force protection exists on authentication endpoints.

You are affected if you operate a 2nd Line server where the token validation logic checks only the first character of user_token, allowing trivial brute force attacks.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Fix the server-side token validation to properly validate the entire user_token string, implement rate limiting on authentication endpoints, and consider additional security measures like account lockout policies.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing5.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,150
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,040.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61114 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-61114 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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