CVE-2026-29204
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 · uneditedInsufficient ownership check in `clientarea.php` allows an authenticated client area user to submit requests using another user’s `addonId` without any ownership validation leading to unauthorized access to the victim's account.
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 confidenceThis is an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in clientarea.php where the application fails to validate that the authenticated user owns the addonId being accessed. An authenticated client area user can manipulate the addonId parameter to access or modify another user's addon data, resulting in unauthorized access to sensitive account information.
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
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Locate the clientarea.php fileFind clientarea.php in the web application root or includes directoryAffected if The file exists and handles addon operations
-
Identify addon parameter handlingSearch the file for parameters related to addons (e.g., addonId, addon_id, addon) in GET/POST requestsAffected if The file accepts addon-related parameters without documented ownership checks
-
Examine addon operation codeReview the code logic around addon retrieval or processing functions to see if it verifies user ownership before returning dataAffected if The code retrieves addon data using the provided addonId without querying the database to confirm the authenticated user owns that addon
-
Check for ownership validation functionsSearch for database queries or functions that validate addon ownership (e.g., WHERE user_id = current_user AND addon_id = requested_id)Affected if No such validation exists or the validation can be bypassed
-
Test with another user's addonIdAs an authenticated user, submit a request using an addonId known to belong to a different user and observe if data is returnedAffected if The request succeeds and returns data for an addon owned by another user
If clientarea.php processes addon requests without verifying that the authenticated user owns the specified addonId, the environment is affected by this broken access control vulnerability.
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 proper ownership validation in clientarea.php to ensure users can only access their own addonIds. Add authorization checks that verify the currently authenticated user owns the requested addonId before processing any request.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-29204 — 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-2026-29204 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