CVE-2026-31240
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 · uneditedThe mem0 1.0.0 server lacks authentication and authorization controls for its memory management API endpoints. Critical functions such as updating memory records (PUT /memories/{memory_id}) are exposed without any verification of the requester's identity or permissions. A remote attacker can exploit this by sending unauthenticated requests to modify, overwrite, or delete arbitrary memory records, leading to unauthorized data manipulation and potential data loss.
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 confidencemem0 1.0.0 server exposes memory management API endpoints without authentication or authorization controls. The PUT /memories/{memory_id} endpoint allows unauthenticated remote attackers to modify, overwrite, or delete arbitrary memory records, leading to unauthorized data manipulation.
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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Identify mem0 versionRun 'pip show mem0' or check the running service version banner to determine if version 1.0.0 is installedAffected if The installed version is 1.0.0
-
Locate the mem0 API server processCheck for running processes listening on common API ports (e.g., port 8080) using 'netstat -tlnp' or 'ss -tlnp', or look for mem0 server processesAffected if A mem0 server process is running and accessible on a network port
-
Verify API endpoint accessibilitySend a PUT request to http://<server>:<port>/memories/test123 with no authentication headers (e.g., no API key, Bearer token, or session cookie)Affected if The request is accepted and returns a successful response instead of 401 Unauthorized or 403 Forbidden
-
Check for authentication configurationInspect environment variables, config files, or the application's startup arguments for authentication-related settings such as API_KEY_REQUIRED, AUTH_ENABLED, or similar flagsAffected if No authentication is required or configured for the API server
-
Inspect API route definitions for authorization decoratorsExamine the source code or API documentation to verify if the /memories/{memory_id} route has @require_auth, @login_required, or similar authorization decorators appliedAffected if The memory management endpoints lack authentication and authorization middleware
You are affected if mem0 version 1.0.0 is running and the PUT /memories/{memory_id} endpoint accepts requests without any authentication credentials.
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 authentication (e.g., API keys, OAuth, or JWT tokens) and role-based authorization checks on all memory management API endpoints to verify requester identity and permissions before allowing any CRUD operations.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-31240 — 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-2026-31240 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