CVE-2026-50108
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 Naxclow platform API that returns device relay registration details exposes a persistent credential without verifying that the requester is the legitimate device or owner. An actor able to present a platform-valid request signature can retrieve credentials for arbitrary devices and register on the relay as that device, enabling interception and disruption of its communications.
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 confidenceThe Naxclow platform API that returns device relay registration details exposes persistent credentials without verifying that the requester is the legitimate device or owner. An authenticated actor with a valid platform request signature can retrieve credentials for arbitrary devices and register on the relay as that device, enabling interception and disruption of communications.
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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Naxclow platform API is exposedScan network for services running on typical API ports (443, 8443, 8080) and review web application firewall or API gateway logs for requests to Naxclow endpoints. Check internal asset inventories for Naxclow platform deployments.Affected if The Naxclow platform API is accessible on the network or from untrusted network segments.
-
Verify ownership verification on credential retrieval endpointUsing an authenticated test account, attempt to query the device credential endpoint (typically /api/devices/{deviceId}/credentials or /api/relay/register) for a device you do NOT own or control. Observe whether the API returns persistent credentials without rejecting the request.Affected if The API returns credential data (relay registration tokens, device keys, or authentication tokens) for devices the authenticated requester does not own or control.
-
Check for missing device ownership claims in API requestsReview API request validation logic or proxy logs to determine if the credential retrieval endpoint requires device-specific binding claims (device ID signature, ownership proof tokens, or device-initiated requests). Examine the authentication middleware configuration.Affected if The credential endpoint accepts requests with only a valid platform signature but does not verify the requester controls the target device ID.
-
Inspect audit logs for credential retrieval activitySearch security logging systems for access patterns to credential endpoints where the requesting user differs from device ownership records. Look for high-volume or bulk credential retrieval attempts.Affected if Logs show credential retrieval for many device IDs by a single user account, indicating potential enumeration or mass credential harvesting.
-
Check rate limiting configuration on sensitive endpointsReview API gateway or web application firewall settings to confirm rate limiting is applied to credential retrieval endpoints. Verify if limits exist and are enforced.Affected if No rate limiting is configured on endpoints that return device credentials, allowing unlimited credential retrieval attempts.
A user is affected if the Naxclow platform API returns relay registration credentials for devices the authenticated requester does not own or control, without requiring proof of device ownership.
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/device verification before returning credential data, requiring the requester to prove they own or control the device. Additionally, implement rate limiting and audit logging on sensitive credential retrieval endpoints.
- 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-2026-50108 — 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-2026-50108 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