Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2026-39584

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
71/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
Subscriber Broken Access Control in RepairBuddy <= 4.1132 versions.

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 confidence

Broken Access Control vulnerability in RepairBuddy allows Subscriber-level users to access resources or functionality that should be restricted to higher-privileged roles. This is a classic privilege escalation issue where the application fails to properly enforce authorization checks for subscriber accounts.

MitigationUpgrade RepairBuddy to a version higher than 4.1132, or implement proper role-based access control (RBAC) checks on all sensitive endpoints/functions to ensure subscribers cannot access privileged resources.

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
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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

  1. Identify RepairBuddy installation version
    Locate the RepairBuddy application and check its version information. This may be found in the application metadata, about page, or configuration files (common paths include version manifests, package.json, or the main application binary metadata).
    Affected if The installed version is 4.1132 or lower, indicating the patch for the access control flaw has not been applied.
  2. Verify user role configuration exists
    Examine the RepairBuddy user management system to confirm that role-based access control (RBAC) is implemented. Look for user role definitions in the database, configuration files, or application settings that define roles such as Subscriber, Administrator, or other privilege levels.
    Affected if No formal role definitions or RBAC configuration is found, leaving the system vulnerable to privilege escalation.
  3. Test subscriber account privileges
    Log in with a Subscriber-level user account and attempt to access functionality or resources typically reserved for higher-privileged roles (such as administrative functions, sensitive data, or configuration endpoints).
    Affected if A Subscriber-level account can successfully access resources or perform actions restricted to administrators or other elevated roles.
  4. Review access control enforcement points
    Inspect the application code or API endpoints to identify where authorization checks are performed. Look for missing or weak permission validations before executing privileged operations.
    Affected if Authorization checks are missing, commented out, or insufficiently enforced on sensitive endpoints or functions accessible to Subscriber accounts.
  5. Check audit logs for unauthorized access
    Review RepairBuddy audit logs, access logs, or security event records for instances where Subscriber accounts accessed privileged functions or data.
    Affected if Audit logs show Subscriber accounts accessing resources or executing functions outside their intended permission scope.

The environment is affected if RepairBuddy version is 4.1132 or lower, or if Subscriber-level accounts can access functionality reserved for higher-privileged roles.

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

Upgrade RepairBuddy to a version higher than 4.1132, or implement proper role-based access control (RBAC) checks on all sensitive endpoints/functions to ensure subscribers cannot access privileged resources.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-39584 — 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-2026-39584 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