Aptabase before commit 61d4c01 Authentication Bypass via Known Example AUTH_SECRET
Only self-hosted Aptabase instances still running the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET value are affected; the product has no default AUTH_SECRET. Fixed in main from commit 61d4c01 onwards.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in main from commit 61d4c01 onwards
- Who is exposed
- Specific setups only
Do first: Check whether your setup matches what the bug needs. Self-hosted instance still running the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET value Affected code is main before commit 61d4c01 Instances that set their own random AUTH_SECRET are not affected; the product has no default AUTH_SECRET
- Last modified
- Whether it needs action now or is a reference record, by fixed rules, with why. Last checked is when cve.now last re-read it.What do these mean? →
- Reference
- Last checked
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 21/100 · provisional
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Specific setups only
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
Aptabase before commit 61d4c01 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to forge sign-in links by using the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET. Attackers can enumerate registered e-mails via /api/_auth/signin, forge HS256 JWTs redeemed by /api/_auth/continue, impersonate users, export analytics data, and transfer app ownership.
cve.now Index
- Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure12/25Specific setups only, reachable over the network without a login
- Reach?/20Unknown. No tracked technology or package matched
- Severity9.1/10CVSS 9.1
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 71 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 66 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
What to do
Check whether your setup matches what the bug needs.
Self-hosted instance still running the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET value Affected code is main before commit 61d4c01 Instances that set their own random AUTH_SECRET are not affected; the product has no default AUTH_SECRETUpgrade to a fixed version: main from commit 61d4c01 onwards.
Workaround: Set AUTH_SECRET to a private random value, for example the output of openssl rand -base64 32.
Check your systems with an agent
Paste this into a coding or ops agent. It checks your systems read-only and reports a table per asset.
Check whether my systems are affected by CVE-2026-125758 (Aptabase before commit 61d4c01 Authentication Bypass via Known Example AUTH_SECRET), using the cve.now data below. Rules: work read-only. Do not run exploit code, proof-of-concept scripts or scanners that send attack payloads, and do not change any configuration, package, image or deployment. Report findings only. What cve.now has for CVE-2026-125758 (entry last updated 2026-11-10): Affected: - aptabase aptabase: version range not reported Fixed versions: main from commit 61d4c01 onwards. Conditions (all must be true for the bug to be hit): - Self-hosted instance still running the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET value (source: https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/security/advisories/GHSA-gc76-cqm4-vqcf) - Affected code is main before commit 61d4c01 (source: https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/security/advisories/GHSA-gc76-cqm4-vqcf) - Instances that set their own random AUTH_SECRET are not affected; the product has no default AUTH_SECRET (source: https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/security/advisories/GHSA-gc76-cqm4-vqcf) Setup: the bug needs a feature or setting that is off by default or uncommon. Check whether each asset has it on. Attacker needs: network access, no login, no user action. Workaround: Set AUTH_SECRET to a private random value, for example the output of openssl rand -base64 32. (source: https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/security/advisories/GHSA-gc76-cqm4-vqcf) CISA KEV: CVE-2026-125758 is not listed as of cve.now's last read. This KEV status is for CVE-2026-125758 only. If you also check another CVE, look up its own KEV status; never assume it from this one. How to check: - Installed software: check what is actually running, not what a repo declares. Read the version from each host, container image and Kubernetes node (the binary's version output, the OS package database, image layers), and check whether the conditions above hold there. Distribution packages may carry a backported fix under an older version number; confirm against the distribution's own advisory. Verify against the linked advisories before concluding, and cite the date you read each one: - https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/security/advisories/GHSA-gc76-cqm4-vqcf - https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/commit/61d4c01298a706d575265461ac07bb956ca7b8d2 - https://github.com/aptabase/aptabase/pull/204 - https://github.com/aptabase/self-hosting/commit/b79a472419ff17e485d0bd5b4adf1b1ef2b9953c - https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/aptabase-before-commit-61d4c01-authentication-bypass-via-known-example-auth-secret Do not conclude an asset is unaffected unless you checked it and the evidence covers both its version and the conditions above. If you could not check something, mark it unknown and say what is missing. Report a table with one row per asset and these columns: Asset | Version or build | Status (affected, fixed, not applicable, unknown) | Compensating controls | Exposure (internet-facing, internal, none) | Evidence | Next action. Entry: https://cve.now/CVE-2026-125758 For follow-up questions, use the cve.now MCP server at https://mcp.cve.now/mcp (no authentication), for example get_vulnerability with id CVE-2026-125758.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
- Posted on X by cve.now
Affected versions
- aptabase aptabase
Version range not reported
Evidence 7
Vendor advisory · 1
Establishes: Affected and fixed versions.
- Advisory
CVE record · 2
Establishes: The identifier and description.
- Record
- Record
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-125758
Is CVE-2026-125758 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
What does this mean?
The example AUTH_SECRET value is public, so an attacker who knows it can sign in as any user whose e-mail they know. They can then read and export that user's analytics events, including event properties, and transfer app ownership to their own account.Source: github.com
Am I affected, and how do I check?
The affected code is main before commit 61d4c01. Only self-hosted instances still running the publicly known example AUTH_SECRET value are affected; instances that set their own random AUTH_SECRET are not, because the product has no default for it. To check, look at the AUTH_SECRET value set in the deployment's configuration.Source: github.com
How do I fix CVE-2026-125758?
Upgrade to ghcr.io/aptabase/aptabase:main from commit 61d4c01 onwards. Until then, set AUTH_SECRET to a private random value, for example the output of openssl rand -base64 32.Source: github.com