VulnerabilityPublished 11 Jun 2025Updated 24 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-0163: IBM Security Verify Access · Response Discrepancy Information Exposure

Affects IBM Security Verify AccessSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 27% 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:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 11 Jun 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 Security Verify Access	Affected =10.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Monitor IBM's official channels for patches or updates addressing CVE-2025-0163 and apply them promptly once available. 2) Implement network-level controls such as firewall rules or intrusion detection/prevention systems to limit access to the IBM Security Verify Access management interfaces to trusted IP ranges only. 3) Employ rate limiting and anomaly detection on authentication and account verification endpoints to detect and block enumeration attempts. 4) Review and harden account lockout policies to prevent attackers from leveraging enumerated usernames for brute force attacks. 5) Conduct internal audits and penetration testing to identify any response discrepancies and adjust application logic to provide uniform responses regardless of account status, thereby eliminating side-channel information leaks. 6) Educate security teams about this vulnerability to enhance monitoring for suspicious activities related to user enumeration attempts. 7) Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block enumeration patterns targeting the affected product.

Description

IBM Security Verify Access Appliance and Docker 10.0 through 10.0.8 could allow a remote attacker to enumerate usernames due to an observable response discrepancy of disabled accounts.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality of user identity information within IBM Security Verify Access deployments. Since this product is used for access management and authentication, the ability to enumerate valid usernames can aid attackers in crafting targeted attacks, including credential stuffing, phishing, or brute force attempts. This could lead to unauthorized access if combined with other vulnerabilities or weak password policies. While the vulnerability itself does not directly compromise system integrity or availability, the exposure of valid usernames undermines the security posture of identity management systems, which are critical for protecting sensitive data and services. Organizations in sectors with high regulatory requirements such as finance, healthcare, and government may face increased compliance risks if such information disclosure leads to broader security incidents. Additionally, the lack of authentication requirement and remote exploitability means attackers can attempt enumeration without prior access, increasing the threat surface.

CWE-204Observable Response Discrepancy (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product provides different responses to incoming requests in a way that reveals internal state information to an unauthorized actor outside of the intended control sphere.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation
Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
ICMP IP Total Length Field Probe (opens in a new tab)
ICMP IP 'ID' Field Error Message Probe (opens in a new tab)
Application Fingerprinting (opens in a new tab)
System Footprinting (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7236314 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Aug 2025, 00:36 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-204

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats