CVE-2026-25505
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 · uneditedBambuddy is a self-hosted print archive and management system for Bambu Lab 3D printers. Prior to version 0.1.7, a hardcoded secret key used for signing JWTs is checked into source code and ManyAPI routes do not check authentication. This issue has been patched in version 0.1.7.
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 confidenceBambuddy prior to version 0.1.7 contains two critical flaws: a hardcoded secret key for signing JWTs is committed to source code, and ManyAPI routes lack authentication checks entirely. This allows attackers to forge valid JWT tokens using the known secret and/or access protected API endpoints without credentials.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 0.1.7CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Check installed Bambuddy versionLocate the Bambuddy installation and determine the version number using package manager metadata, version file, or application startup bannerAffected if Version is less than 0.1.7
-
Search for hardcoded JWT secret in sourceInspect source code files for patterns matching JWT secret keys, look for hardcoded strings used in token signing operations, check configuration files and code repositories for secrets labeled as JWT or token signing keysAffected if A hardcoded secret key used for JWT signing is found in the source code
-
Verify ManyAPI route authenticationAttempt to access ManyAPI endpoints without providing any authentication credentials or tokens, observe whether the requests are accepted or rejectedAffected if ManyAPI routes respond successfully without requiring authentication credentials
Environment is affected if Bambuddy version is below 0.1.7 AND either a hardcoded JWT secret exists in the source code OR ManyAPI endpoints are accessible without authentication.
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.
dbcve · scoped0.1.7
Upgrade to Bambuddy version 0.1.7 or later, and rotate any JWT secrets that may have been exposed in the hardcoded key.
0.1.7
- Backup your current Bambuddy installation and database before upgrading
- Update to Bambuddy version 0.1.7
- Verify that the hardcoded secret key has been removed from the codebase (check auth.py)
- Ensure authentication is now required for ManyAPI routes
- Restart the application to load the updated code
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-25505 — 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-2026-25505 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