VulnerabilityPublished 28 Feb 2025Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-0159: IBM Storage Virtualize · Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel

Affects IBM Storage VirtualizeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 58% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: 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: 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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 28 Feb 2025
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
IBM Storage Virtualize	Affected 8.5.0.0 – 8.7.2.0 11 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately inventory their IBM Storage Virtualize deployments to identify affected versions. Until IBM releases official patches, the following mitigations are recommended: 1) Restrict network access to the RPCAdapter endpoint by implementing strict firewall rules and network segmentation to limit exposure only to trusted management networks. 2) Employ intrusion detection and prevention systems to monitor and block suspicious HTTP requests targeting the RPCAdapter interface. 3) Enforce strong access controls and multi-factor authentication on management interfaces where possible to reduce risk. 4) Regularly audit logs for unusual access patterns or failed authentication attempts related to storage management endpoints. 5) Engage with IBM support for any available interim patches or workarounds. 6) Plan for rapid deployment of official patches once released and test updates in controlled environments prior to production rollout. 7) Educate security teams about this vulnerability to ensure timely detection and response to potential exploitation attempts.

Description

IBM FlashSystem (IBM Storage Virtualize (8.5.0.0 through 8.5.0.13, 8.5.1.0, 8.5.2.0 through 8.5.2.3, 8.5.3.0 through 8.5.3.1, 8.5.4.0, 8.6.0.0 through 8.6.0.5, 8.6.1.0, 8.6.2.0 through 8.6.2.1, 8.6.3.0, 8.7.0.0 through 8.7.0.2, 8.7.1.0, 8.7.2.0 through 8.7.2.1) could allow a remote attacker to bypass RPCAdapter endpoint authentication by sending a specifically crafted HTTP request.

Impact

The authentication bypass vulnerability in IBM Storage Virtualize can have severe consequences for organizations worldwide. Unauthorized access to the RPCAdapter endpoint can allow attackers to gain control over storage management functions, potentially exposing sensitive data or enabling unauthorized data modification. This can lead to data breaches, loss of data integrity, and compromise of critical storage infrastructure. Since IBM FlashSystem is widely deployed in enterprise data centers, cloud providers, and large organizations, exploitation could disrupt business operations and damage organizational reputation. The lack of required authentication and user interaction lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing the risk of automated attacks or targeted intrusions. Although no active exploits are known currently, the critical severity and ease of exploitation make this a high-risk vulnerability that could be leveraged by cybercriminals or nation-state actors to compromise valuable data assets.

CWE-288Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product requires authentication, but the product has an alternate path or channel that does not require authentication.
Architecture and Design
Funnel all access through a single choke point to simplify how users can access a resource. For every access, perform a check to determine if the user has permissions to access the resource.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7184182 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 19:45 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-288

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats