dbcve.org
Authorization Bypass (IDOR)Weakness · CWE-639

CVE-2026-40768

HIGH · 7.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-17
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges 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
Unauthenticated Insecure Direct Object References (IDOR) in Salon booking system <= 10.30.24 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

Unauthenticated IDOR vulnerability in Salon booking system allows attackers to directly reference booking objects (likely by ID number) without any authentication, potentially enabling unauthorized access or modification of customer booking records.

MitigationImplement proper authorization checks validating user identity and ownership before granting access to booking objects, and replace direct object references with indirect/mapped references.

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
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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

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 the salon booking system
    Locate the application binary or web application name. Check the software's 'About' page, header files, or the main entry point for the product name and version number. Compare your installed version to any documented versions from the vendor.
    Affected if The system is a salon booking application and the installed version is older than the patched release, or the version cannot be determined.
  2. Verify if booking endpoints require authentication
    Examine the application's authentication configuration. Check login/authorization settings, session management config files, or API middleware that validates user credentials before processing booking requests.
    Affected if Booking-related API endpoints or pages do not enforce authentication and allow requests to proceed without a valid session token or login credential.
  3. Inspect direct object reference usage in booking URLs
    Review the application URL structure and API endpoints used for bookings. Look for patterns like /booking/{id} or /view_booking.php?id= that expose booking record IDs directly in requests without additional authorization parameters.
    Affected if The application uses predictable, sequential, or direct booking IDs in URLs or API calls without proof of ownership or authorization validation.
  4. Test unauthenticated booking access
    Send a crafted HTTP request to booking retrieval or modification endpoints using a known or guessed booking ID without including any authentication headers, cookies, or tokens. Observe whether the system returns booking data or allows modification.
    Affected if The system returns booking records or allows changes when accessed without any authentication credentials.
  5. Check authorization logic for booking resources
    Review the application's source code or configuration for authorization checks on booking-related functions. Look for logic that validates user identity and ownership before returning or modifying booking data.
    Affected if No ownership validation or authorization check exists before returning booking object data to the requester.

You are affected if your salon booking system exposes booking objects through direct IDs and permits unauthenticated access to view or modify those records.

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

Implement proper authorization checks validating user identity and ownership before granting access to booking objects, and replace direct object references with indirect/mapped references.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,800
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,480.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40768 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2026-40768 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