VulnerabilityPublished 24 Feb 2026Updated 12 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-10010: CPSD IT SERVICES CryptoPro Secure Disk for BitLocker · Missing Support for Integrity Check

Affects CPSD IT SERVICES CryptoPro Secure Disk for BitLockerSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.8 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Feb 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 29 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.
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
CPSD IT SERVICES GMBHCryptoPro Secure Disk for BitLocker	Affected =<7.6.6 / 7.7.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Apply vendor patches or updates as soon as they become available for versions prior to 7.6.6 and 7.7.1 to ensure configuration files are included in integrity checks.
Implement strict physical security controls to prevent unauthorized access to devices, including secure storage, tamper-evident seals, and device tracking.
Use full disk encryption solutions that protect all partitions, including those containing pre-boot environments, or ensure the pre-boot partition is encrypted or integrity-protected.
Regularly audit and monitor device integrity using hardware-based security modules or trusted platform modules (TPMs) to detect unauthorized changes.
Employ endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools capable of identifying unusual boot-time behaviors or root-level code execution.
Educate users and administrators about the risks of physical access attacks and enforce policies for device handling and loss reporting.
Consider multi-factor authentication mechanisms that do not rely solely on pre-boot Linux OS authentication to reduce risk.

Description

The CPSD CryptoPro Secure Disk application boots a small Linux operating system to perform user authentication before using BitLocker to decrypt the Windows partition. The system is located on a separate unencrypted partition which can be reached by anyone with access to the hard disk. Multiple checks are performed to validate the integrity of the Linux operating system and the CryptoPro Secure Disk application files. When files are changed an error is shown on system start. One of the checks is the Linux kernel's Integrity Measurement Architecture (IMA). It was identified that configuration files are not validated by the IMA and can then (if not checked by other measures) be changed. This allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code in the context of the root user and enables an attacker to e.g., plant a backdoor and access data during execution.

Impact

The vulnerability allows attackers with physical access to bypass critical integrity protections by modifying unencrypted configuration files, leading to arbitrary root code execution during the pre-boot authentication phase. This compromises the security guarantees of BitLocker encryption by enabling attackers to plant backdoors or malware that can access decrypted data once the system boots. The impact includes full compromise of data confidentiality, integrity, and availability on affected systems. Organizations relying on CryptoPro Secure Disk for BitLocker in high-security environments, such as government, finance, or critical infrastructure, face increased risk of data breaches and persistent compromise. The attack requires physical access but no authentication or user interaction, making it particularly dangerous in scenarios where devices are lost, stolen, or accessible to insiders. The lack of integrity checks on configuration files undermines the trustworthiness of the entire pre-boot authentication process.

CWE-353Missing Support for Integrity Check (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a transmission protocol that does not include a mechanism for verifying the integrity of the data during transmission, such as a checksum.
Architecture and Design
Add an appropriately sized checksum to the protocol, ensuring that data received may be simply validated before it is parsed and used.
Implementation
Ensure that the checksums present in the protocol design are properly implemented and added to each message before it is sent.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V10.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Content Spoofing Via Application API Manipulation (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data Tokens (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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Mar 2026, 18:59 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-353

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats