CVE-2026-8878
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 · uneditedVersion 3.0.7 of the Securly Chrome Extension exposes multiple publicly accessible endpoints that allow unauthenticated access to sensitive data. The exposed information consists of SHA-1 hashes that are inadequately obfuscated using a simple Caesar cipher, which can be easily reversed to recover the original hash values and access the protected data.
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 confidenceThe Securly Chrome Extension version 3.0.7 contains multiple publicly accessible endpoints that can be reached without authentication. These endpoints expose sensitive data in the form of SHA-1 hashes that are weakly protected using a simple Caesar cipher, which can be trivially reversed to recover the original hash values and access protected information.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 3.0.7CVSS 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.
-
Verify Securly Chrome Extension version 3.0.7 is installedOpen Chrome, navigate to chrome://extensions, enable Developer mode, locate Securly extension, and check the version number listedAffected if The installed version is exactly 3.0.7
-
Confirm the extension is enabled and runningIn Chrome extensions管理页面, verify the Securly extension toggle is enabled and there are no error indicatorsAffected if The extension is active and loaded in the browser
-
Identify publicly accessible endpointsExamine network traffic or review extension source files (manifest.json, background scripts) for HTTP endpoints that do not require authentication headers or tokensAffected if Endpoints are accessible without requiring authentication credentials
-
Test endpoint accessibility without authenticationUse browser developer tools or curl to make requests to the identified endpoints without providing any authorization tokensAffected if The endpoints return data or respond successfully without authentication
-
Verify Caesar cipher obfuscation is in useInspect response data from the exposed endpoints for patterns characteristic of simple substitution ciphers applied to hash-like stringsAffected if Returned data contains obfuscated strings that appear to be hash values with trivial encoding applied
A defender is affected if Securly Chrome Extension version 3.0.7 is installed with the extension enabled and the exposed unauthenticated endpoints are reachable, returning Caesar-cipher obfuscated hash data.
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 dataUpdate to a patched version of the extension and implement proper authentication on all endpoints. Replace the inadequate Caesar cipher obfuscation with proper cryptographic protection or eliminate the exposure of hash data entirely.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-8878 — 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-2026-8878 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