VulnerabilityPublished 6 Aug 2026Updated 8 Aug 2026

CVE-2026-48071: open-reception appointment-booking-software · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts

Affects open-reception appointment-booking-softwareSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.8 Medium : upgrade to 1.0.4 when convenient.

Data as of 5 Nov 2026, 00:01 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.0.4

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 Aug 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 5 Nov 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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

Upgrade appointment-booking-software and open-reception/appointment-booking-software to 1.0.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
open-receptionappointment-booking-software	Affected <1.0.4	Fixed in 1.0.4
GitHubopen-reception/appointment-booking-software`pkg:github/open-reception/appointment-booking-software`Other threats	Affected <1.0.4	Fixed in 1.0.4

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Upgrade to OpenReception appointment booking software version 1.0.4 or later, where this issue is patched. The patch addresses the shared throttle key problem that allowed cross-tenant lockouts. No other mitigation is indicated or required.

Description

OpenReception's appointment booking software versions prior to 1.0.4 have an issue with improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The software uses a shared throttle key based on emailHash across all tenants, causing failed authentication attempts in one tenant to affect others. This allows an attacker to cause denial of service by locking out a user across multiple tenants by repeatedly failing PIN challenges. The lockout durations escalate with repeated failures, lasting up to 60 minutes. The issue is patched in version 1.0.4.

Impact

An attacker can cause a denial of service against a patient by locking them out of appointment booking across multiple tenants sharing the platform, without needing any relationship to the targeted tenant. The lockout durations escalate from 60 seconds up to 60 minutes with repeated failed attempts, potentially causing sustained denial of service. There is no impact on confidentiality or integrity, only availability is affected.

CWE-307Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.
Architecture and Design
Common protection mechanisms include: Disconnecting the user after a small number of failed attempts; Implementing a timeout; Locking out a targeted account; Requiring a computational task on the user's part.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Dictionary-based Password Attack (opens in a new tab)
Password Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Password Spraying (opens in a new tab)
Credential Stuffing (opens in a new tab)
Use of Known Kerberos Credentials (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Aug 2026, 15:50 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-307

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats