CVE-2026-25875
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 · uneditedPlaciPy is a placement management system designed for educational institutions. In version 1.0.0, The admin authorization middleware trusts client-controlled JWT claims (role and scope) without enforcing server-side role verification.
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 confidencePlaciPy 1.0.0 contains a critical authorization bypass vulnerability where the admin middleware accepts role and scope claims directly from client-provided JWT tokens without server-side validation. An attacker can craft a JWT with elevated privileges (admin role) and gain unauthorized access to administrative functions.
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= 1.0.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify PlaciPy versionRun pip show placipy or check your package manager to confirm the installed version is exactly 1.0.0Affected if Version is 1.0.0 exactly
-
Verify JWT authentication is in useInspect application configuration files or source code to determine if JWT tokens are being used for authenticationAffected if JWT-based authentication is enabled in the application
-
Examine admin middleware role handlingReview the admin middleware source code to see how role claims are processed - specifically look for whether JWT role/scope claims are read directly from the token without server-side validation against a backend data sourceAffected if The middleware accepts role and scope claims directly from client-provided JWT without trusted source validation
-
Check for server-side role validationSearch the codebase for role validation logic that queries a backend database or trusted source to verify user roles, rather than trusting JWT claims outrightAffected if No server-side role validation against a trusted backend data source exists in the authentication flow
You are affected if running PlaciPy 1.0.0 with JWT authentication where the admin middleware trusts role/scope claims from client tokens without validating them against a server-side backend data source.
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 server-side role verification by validating user roles against a trusted backend data source rather than trusting client-controlled JWT claims. Enforce role-based access control (RBAC) at the application level.
- 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-2026-25875 — 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-2026-25875 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