Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2026-8077

HIGH · 8.6 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-05-08
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
92/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
Lack of proper authorization implementation in the CashDro 3 web administration panel, version 24.01.00.26. The backend lacks authorization controls, leaving security entirely to the frontend. By modifying the binary string in the ‘Permissions’ field of the JSON response, an attacker could escalate privileges and gain full administrative access. This vulnerability allows all restrictions to be bypassed and completely compromises system management.

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

Broken access control vulnerability in CashDro 3 web admin panel v24.01.00.26 where the backend lacks server-side authorization checks, relying entirely on frontend controls. Attackers can modify the binary string in the 'Permissions' field of JSON responses to escalate privileges to full administrative access.

MitigationImplement server-side authorization validation on all backend endpoints; never trust client-side data for access control decisions. Validate and enforce user permissions before executing any administrative action.

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:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if CashDro 3 web admin panel is running
    Access the web interface of your CashDro device or check running services on the host. Typically accessible via HTTP/HTTPS on port 80/443 or a custom admin port.
    Affected if CashDro 3 web admin panel is accessible on your network
  2. Determine the installed version
    Check the admin panel login page or system information section for the version number. Common locations include the footer, About page, or system settings. The affected version is v24.01.00.26.
    Affected if The installed version matches v24.01.00.26 or falls within the v24.01.00.x branch
  3. Verify if JSON API endpoints are accessible
    Interact with the web admin panel and examine network traffic or logs for JSON responses. Look for API endpoints that return JSON data containing a 'Permissions' field.
    Affected if The system returns JSON responses with a 'Permissions' field that could be modified by the client
  4. Check for server-side authorization enforcement
    Attempt to modify the 'Permissions' field value in a JSON response and send it back to the server with an elevated permission request. Observe if the server accepts or enforces the modified value.
    Affected if The server accepts client-modified permission values without validation, indicating lack of server-side authorization checks

You are affected if you are running CashDro 3 version v24.01.00.26 (or similar v24.01.00.x versions) with the web admin panel accessible and the backend relies on client-side permission controls.

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 server-side authorization validation on all backend endpoints; never trust client-side data for access control decisions. Validate and enforce user permissions before executing any administrative action.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
24.0 hours of engineering $4,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,720.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-8077 — 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-2026-8077 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