Resource Allocation Without LimitsWeakness · CWE-770

CVE-2026-56324

HIGH · 8.2 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
91/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
Capgo before 12.128.2 contains a rate limit bypass vulnerability in the channel_self endpoint that allows attackers to circumvent rate limiting by rotating the user-controlled device_id parameter. Attackers can send multiple requests per second by changing device_id values to flood the channel_devices table and cause database exhaustion.

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 confidence

Capgo before version 12.128.2 has a rate limit bypass in the channel_self endpoint where attackers rotate the user-controlled device_id parameter to circumvent per-device rate limits. This allows attackers to send multiple requests per second, flooding the channel_devices table and causing database exhaustion.

MitigationImplement rate limiting that accounts for device_id rotation patterns (e.g., rate limit per source IP, account, or implement device fingerprinting) and add database cleanup or pagination to prevent exhaustion of the channel_devices table.

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
Low
Availability
High

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

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. Check installed Capgo version
    Locate the Capgo application version in your deployment (check package.json, docker image tags, or admin dashboard About section) and compare it to 12.128.2
    Affected if Version is lower than 12.128.2
  2. Verify channel_self endpoint exposure
    Identify if the /api/channels/self or equivalent channel_self API endpoint is publicly accessible or exposed to untrusted users
    Affected if Endpoint is exposed to users who can supply arbitrary device_id values
  3. Inspect rate limiting configuration
    Review rate limiting settings for the channel_self endpoint, specifically check if limits are applied per-device-id rather than per-IP or per-account
    Affected if Rate limits are enforced solely on device_id without additional constraints (IP, account, fingerprint)
  4. Examine channel_devices table activity
    Query the channel_devices table for unusual patterns: many recent inserts, duplicate device_ids across short time windows, or growing row counts without cleanup
    Affected if Table shows rapid growth or many distinct device_ids created in a short period

You are affected if running Capgo below version 12.128.2 with an exposed channel_self endpoint that enforces rate limits only per device_id, and the channel_devices table shows signs of rapid or anomalous growth.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement rate limiting that accounts for device_id rotation patterns (e.g., rate limit per source IP, account, or implement device fingerprinting) and add database cleanup or pagination to prevent exhaustion of the channel_devices table.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Capgo 12.128.2 or later

  1. 1. Identify the current version of Capgo installed in your environment
  2. 2. Upgrade Capgo to version 12.128.2 or later to resolve the rate limit bypass vulnerability
  3. 3. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the Capgo version
  4. 4. Monitor the channel_self endpoint and channel_devices table for any abnormal request patterns after patching

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

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-2026-56324 — 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-2026-56324 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