CVE-2026-7841
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 · uneditedA remote code execution vulnerability exists in Notification Settings on GeoVision GV-ASWeb 6.2.0. An authenticated user with System Setting permissions can execute arbitrary commands on the server by sending a crafted HTTP POST request to the ASWebCommon.srf backend endpoint to bypass the frontend restrictions.
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 confidenceAuthenticated remote code execution vulnerability in GeoVision GV-ASWeb 6.2.0 Notification Settings. An attacker with System Setting permissions can bypass frontend restrictions by sending crafted HTTP POST requests to the ASWebCommon.srf endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on the server.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm GV-ASWeb installation and versionLocate the GV-ASWeb installation directory or check the web interface login page for version information. Typically found in the application's about page or in installed program files under the GeoVision directory.Affected if The installed version is exactly 6.2.0 or falls within the affected range around 6.2.0.
-
Verify user permission levelLog into GV-ASWeb and navigate to User Management or System Settings. Check the account details for the user in question to see if 'System Setting' permissions are granted.Affected if The user account has System Setting permissions enabled.
-
Check Notification Settings accessibilityNavigate to Notification Settings within the GV-ASWeb administration panel. Attempt to access the settings page that handles notifications (email, SMS, or event notifications).Affected if The Notification Settings page is accessible to the authenticated user with System Setting permissions.
-
Inspect ASWebCommon.srf endpoint accessibilityExamine web server logs or use network inspection tools to determine if requests to /ASWebCommon.srf are being processed. Check if this endpoint responds to POST requests.Affected if The ASWebCommon.srf endpoint is reachable and accepts POST requests from authenticated users.
-
Review web application logs for suspicious activityCheck GV-ASWeb server logs for any unusual or crafted POST requests to ASWebCommon.srf, particularly those containing unexpected parameter patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts.
A user is affected if GV-ASWeb version 6.2.0 is running and the user account has System Setting permissions, allowing access to the vulnerable Notification Settings feature via the ASWebCommon.srf endpoint.
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 dataApply vendor patch if available; otherwise restrict administrative access to trusted users only and implement strict input validation on backend endpoints to prevent command injection.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7841 — 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-2026-7841 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