Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-49223. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-49223 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-49223. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, identity provider logs, authentication audit logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-49223 using CVSS 7.6, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

highAuth Bypass

CVE-2026-49223

CVE-2026-49223 — Vvveb product review authorization bypass allows Vendors to read, approve, edit, or delete reviews under other Vendors' products

Q: What is CVE-2026-49223?

CVE-2026-49223 is Vvveb product review authorization bypass allows Vendors to read, approve, edit, or delete reviews under other Vendors' products. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Auth Bypass mapped to CWE-639 CWE-639.

Vvveb is a powerful and easy to use CMS with page builder to build websites, blogs or ecommerce stores. Prior to 1.0.8.4, Vvveb backend product review operations allow a low-privileged Vendor to manage reviews under another Vendor's products. The admin/sql/sqlite/product_review.sql queries accept a caller-controlled product_review_id and do not verify product_review.product_id against product.admin_id for the current admin_id. An attacker can read pending review content, ratings, author information, and moderation state, change review status, edit review content, or delete reviews, manipulating product review visibility and integrity. This issue is fixed in version 1.0.8.4.

Published Aug 18, 2026Updated Aug 18, 2026Sources: NVD, givanz (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

ahead of 12% of scored CVEs

Affects

givanz

Vvveb

CVSS base

7.6

high

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade Vvveb to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
givanz	Vvveb	< 1.0.8.4	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

Low

Confidentiality

Low

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
7.6	CVSS 3.1	high	2.8	4.7	GitHub (CNA), givanz (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-639 · Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

Bypass Protection Mechanism
Gain Privileges or Assume Identity

Mitigation: For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-639

Inferred from the weakness class — not observed against this CVE.

CAPEC-115 · Authentication BypassCAPEC-94 · Adversary in the Middle

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /sql/sqlite/product_review.sql.
Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable Vvveb.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSidentity provider logsauthentication audit logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 7.6 (AV:N)
Aug 18, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Aug 18, 2026 · NVD

References

3 on the record

github.com/givanz/Vvveb/commit/3d5c15dcf4b50e4580161f05cb9e643d834d044a
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
github.com/givanz/Vvveb/releases/tag/1.0.8.4
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre
github.com/givanz/Vvveb/security/advisories/GHSA-cj37-c5m2-3jmc
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, Mitre

Elsewhere on this site

givanzevery CVE for this vendor
Auth Bypasssame class
CWE-639other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-49223 is Vvveb product review authorization bypass allows Vendors to read, approve, edit, or delete reviews under other Vendors' products, a high vulnerability affecting Vvveb from givanz. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-49223. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-49223. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 7.6 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.