CVE-2026-9175
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 · uneditedThe Devs Accounting – Simple Accounting and Invoicing Solution plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Missing Authorization in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.0. This is due to the get_single_account() REST API callback being registered with a permission_callback that unconditionally returns true, providing no authentication or authorization checks on the /devs-accounting/v1/get-account/<id> endpoint. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to read arbitrary private financial account records (including account name, bank name, and opening balance) by enumerating the numeric account ID, resulting in sensitive information disclosure.
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 plugin registers a REST API endpoint at /devs-accounting/v1/get-account/<id> with a permission_callback that unconditionally returns true, making the get_single_account() function accessible to any unauthenticated user. Attackers can enumerate numeric account IDs to retrieve sensitive financial data including account names, bank names, and opening balances.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 devs-accounting plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and look for 'Devs Accounting' or 'devs-accounting' in the list. Note the version number displayed under the plugin name.Affected if The plugin is installed and the version is below 1.2.1 (or version cannot be determined)
-
Test unauthenticated access to the vulnerable endpointSend a GET request to /wp-json/devs-accounting/v1/get-account/1 using a tool like curl or a browser. Do not include any authentication headers or cookies.Affected if The endpoint returns HTTP 200 with JSON containing account data (e.g., account name, bank name, opening balance) without requiring login
-
Confirm the permission_callback vulnerabilityInspect the plugin source code (typically in wp-content/plugins/devs-accounting/) and locate the REST route registration for /devs-accounting/v1/get-account/<id>. Check the permission_callback function - if it returns true without checking user capabilities, the vulnerability exists.Affected if The permission_callback unconditionally returns true or has no authorization check
A user is affected if the devs-accounting plugin is installed with a version before 1.2.1 AND the /wp-json/devs-accounting/v1/get-account/<id> endpoint is accessible without authentication, returning sensitive financial 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 version 1.2.1 or later which includes proper authorization checks; alternatively, disable the plugin until a patched version is available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9175 — 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-2026-9175 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