CVE-2026-56679
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 · unedited9Router is an AI router & token saver. Prior to 0.5.4, the PATCH /api/settings endpoint writes the entire request body to persistent settings without a field whitelist, allowing an authenticated user to set security-critical fields such as requireLogin and disable authentication for the whole application, exposing protected routes such as /api/keys and /api/providers to unauthenticated access. This issue is reported as fixed in version 0.5.4.
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 PATCH /api/settings endpoint in 9Router versions prior to 0.5.4 writes the entire request body to persistent settings without field whitelist validation, allowing authenticated users to modify security-critical fields like requireLogin and disable authentication, thereby exposing protected endpoints such as /api/keys and /api/providers to unauthenticated access.
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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 installed 9Router versionCheck the application's version string (typically via /api/version endpoint, CLI version flag, or package manager listing)Affected if Version is present and less than 0.5.4 (e.g., 0.5.3, 0.5.2, 0.5.0, etc.)
-
Verify PATCH /api/settings endpoint existsSend a OPTIONS or HEAD request to PATCH /api/settings or inspect API documentation/routes configurationAffected if The endpoint responds to PATCH method and accepts JSON body for settings modification
-
Inspect current security settings configurationQuery the GET /api/settings endpoint or check the persistent settings storage (database/config file) for fields: requireLogin and disableAuthenticationAffected if These fields exist in the settings schema and can potentially be modified via PATCH
-
Confirm authentication layer configurationReview server configuration or authentication middleware logs to verify that /api/keys and /api/providers endpoints rely on requireLogin or disableAuthentication flagsAffected if These protected endpoints depend on the settable security flags that can be altered via the vulnerable PATCH endpoint
You are affected if running 9Router version prior to 0.5.4 AND the PATCH /api/settings endpoint permits modification of security-critical fields like requireLogin or disableAuthentication without server-side validation.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to version 0.5.4 or implement server-side field whitelist validation for the settings endpoint to restrict which configuration options can be modified, explicitly blocking security-critical fields from user-controlled input.
0.5.4
- Upgrade 9Router to version 0.5.4 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-56679 — 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-2026-56679 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