Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2025-66956

CRITICAL · 9.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-11
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
Insecure Access Control in Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS and Fax components in Asseco SEE Live 2.0 allows remote attackers to access and execute attachments via a computable URL.

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

Insecure access control in Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS and Fax components of Asseco SEE Live 2.0 allows unauthenticated remote attackers to access and execute file attachments through predictable/computable URLs, enabling potential remote code execution.

MitigationImplement proper authentication and authorization checks on all attachment access paths across affected components, ensuring URLs are not directly enumerable or predictable without proper session validation.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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 checks

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

  1. Identify if Asseco SEE Live 2.0 is installed
    Check for the application in the system registry (Windows) or application directory (Linux). Look for installed packages named 'Live' or 'asseco' or check the web server document root for the application.
    Affected if Asseco SEE Live 2.0 is found installed on the system
  2. Determine the installed version
    Check the application version via its about page, configuration files, or installed packages. Common locations: /opt/live/version, %PROGRAMFILES%/AssecoSEE/Live/version.info, or the application's main DLL/config file.
    Affected if The installed version is 2.0 or matches the 2.0 release line
  3. Verify if affected components are enabled
    Check the application configuration for Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS, and Fax modules. Look in the main config.xml, web.xml, or admin console for enabled features.
    Affected if Any of Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS, or Fax components are enabled or active
  4. Inspect attachment access URL patterns
    Review the web application's URL routing for attachment/file download endpoints. Common patterns include /attachments/, /download/, /files/, /upload/. Check if these endpoints accept predictable parameters like IDs, timestamps, or sequential numbers without requiring authentication.
    Affected if Attachment endpoints use predictable/computable URL parameters and allow unauthenticated access
  5. Test attachment download without authentication
    Attempt to access attachment URLs directly using a browser or curl without providing session credentials. Try common patterns like /ContactPlan/attachments/{id}, /Email/attachments/{id}, /SMS/attachments/{id}, /Fax/attachments/{id}.
    Affected if Files can be downloaded or executed without authentication

A user is affected if Asseco SEE Live 2.0 is installed with any of the Contact Plan, E-Mail, SMS, or Fax components enabled, and attachment URLs are accessible without authentication.

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

Implement proper authentication and authorization checks on all attachment access paths across affected components, ensuring URLs are not directly enumerable or predictable without proper session validation.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-66956 — 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-2025-66956 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