VulnerabilityPublished 26 Jan 2024Updated 29 May 2025

CVE-2023-48126

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 29% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Jan 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

European organizations should first assess whether they or their customers use the Luxe Beauty Clinic mini-app or similar Line mini-apps. If so, they should coordinate with the app developers or Line platform administrators to confirm if patches or updates addressing token leakage are available and apply them promptly. Implementing strict token management policies is critical: tokens should have minimal privileges, short lifetimes, and be rotated regularly. Monitoring and logging notification activities can help detect anomalous or unauthorized messages. User education is important to raise awareness about suspicious notifications and encourage verification before acting on them. Additionally, organizations should consider restricting the use of third-party mini-apps within their communication channels or sandboxing them to limit potential damage. If possible, disabling or limiting the use of the affected mini-app until a fix is available is advisable. Finally, organizations should engage with Line's security or support teams to report the issue and seek guidance on best practices for secure token handling.

Description

An issue in Luxe Beauty Clinic mini-app on Line v13.6.1 allows attackers to send crafted malicious notifications via leakage of the channel access token.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability depends largely on the adoption and usage of the Line platform and specifically the Luxe Beauty Clinic mini-app within their user base or internal communications. While Line is predominantly popular in East Asia, some European users and businesses may use it for communication or marketing purposes. The ability for attackers to send crafted malicious notifications could lead to targeted phishing campaigns, spreading of misinformation, or social engineering attacks that compromise user credentials or lead to further exploitation. This could affect customer trust, brand reputation, and potentially lead to data breaches if users are tricked into divulging sensitive information. The limited confidentiality and integrity impact suggests attackers cannot directly access or modify backend data but can influence user perception and behavior through deceptive notifications. Organizations relying on Line mini-apps for customer engagement or internal workflows should be cautious, as malicious notifications could disrupt operations or lead to indirect compromise. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the token leakage indicates a design or implementation flaw that could be exploited if tokens are not properly rotated or revoked.

References

github.com/syz913/CVE-reports/blob/main/Luxe%20Beauty%20Clinic.md (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 23:26 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats