CVE-2015-10025VulnerabilityPublished 7 Jan 2023Updated 28 May 2025

CVE-2015-10025: luelista miniConf · Denial of Service

Affects luelista miniConfSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.5 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.5Low

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

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 59% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: 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 7 Jan 2023
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 2026-10-25.

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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubluelista/miniConf`pkg:github/luelista/miniConf`Other threats	Affected =1.7.0 =1.7.1 =1.7.2 =1.7.3 =1.7.4 =1.7.5 =1.7.6	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading luelista miniConf to version 1.7.7 or later (ideally 1.8.0) to remediate this vulnerability. Since the vulnerability requires authenticated access, organizations should also enforce strict access controls and monitor user activities on miniConf instances. Implementing network segmentation to isolate miniConf servers and applying intrusion detection systems to identify unusual access patterns can further reduce risk. Regularly auditing installed software versions and patch levels will ensure timely application of security updates. Additionally, organizations should review and harden authentication mechanisms to prevent unauthorized access by low-privilege users. In environments where immediate upgrading is not feasible, applying compensating controls such as limiting network exposure of miniConf services and increasing logging for anomaly detection is recommended.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in luelista miniConf up to 1.7.6 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file miniConf/MessageView.cs of the component URL Scanning. The manipulation leads to denial of service. Upgrading to version 1.7.7 and 1.8.0 is able to address this issue. The patch is named c06c2e5116c306e4e1bc79779f0eda2d1182f655. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-217615.

Impact

For European organizations using luelista miniConf, this vulnerability could lead to temporary service disruptions if exploited, impacting availability of the affected component. Organizations that rely on miniConf for URL scanning or related messaging services may experience downtime or degraded service performance. Although the severity is low, denial of service conditions can affect business continuity, especially in environments where miniConf is integrated into critical workflows or communication channels. The requirement for low privilege authentication reduces the risk of widespread exploitation but does not eliminate it. In sectors such as finance, healthcare, or government, even brief service interruptions can have operational consequences. However, the lack of impact on confidentiality or integrity means data breaches or unauthorized data manipulation are not concerns with this vulnerability.

Summary

CVE-2015-10025 is a denial of service (DoS) vulnerability found in the luelista miniConf software versions up to 1.7.6. The vulnerability resides in the URL scanning component, specifically within the file miniConf/MessageView.cs. The issue is classified under CWE-404, which relates to improper resource shutdown or release. This vulnerability allows an attacker with low privileges and remote access (AV:A, PR:L) to cause a denial of service without requiring user interaction (UI:N). The vulnerability does not impact confidentiality or integrity but affects availability by causing the application or service to become unresponsive or crash. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 3.5, indicating a low severity level. The issue is addressed by upgrading to versions 1.7.7 or 1.8.0 of miniConf, where a patch (commit c06c2e5116c306e4e1bc79779f0eda2d1182f655) fixes the improper resource handling. There are no known exploits in the wild, and the vulnerability requires some level of authenticated access, limiting the attack surface. The vulnerability's impact is limited to denial of service conditions, which could disrupt services relying on miniConf's URL scanning functionality.

CWE-404Improper Resource Shutdown or Release (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product does not release or incorrectly releases a resource before it is made available for re-use.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation
It is good practice to be responsible for freeing all resources you allocate and to be consistent with how and where you free memory in a function. If you allocate memory that you intend to free upon completion of the function, you must be sure to free the memory at all exit points for that function including error…
Implementation
Memory should be allocated/freed using matching functions such as malloc/free, new/delete, and new[]/delete[].
Attack patterns
TCP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
UDP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Fragmentation (opens in a new tab)
BlueSmacking (opens in a new tab)
Flooding (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 7 Jul 2025, 09:39 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-404

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats