CVE-2025-10080VulnerabilityPublished 8 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10080: running-elephant Datart · Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key

Affects running-elephant DatartSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.3 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

2.3Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 8 Sep 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 2026-10-26.

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
running-elephant Datart	Affected =1.0.0-rc1 =1.0.0-rc2 =1.0.0-rc3	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading running-elephant Datart to versions beyond 1.0.0-rc3 where this vulnerability is patched. If an immediate upgrade is not feasible, organizations should implement compensating controls such as restricting network access to the Datart API to trusted internal networks and enforcing strict authentication and authorization policies. Code audits should be performed to identify and remove any hard-coded cryptographic keys, replacing them with secure key management solutions that use environment variables or dedicated secrets management systems. Additionally, monitoring and logging should be enhanced to detect anomalous access patterns or token usage indicative of exploitation attempts. Organizations should also conduct penetration testing focused on cryptographic key extraction and token forgery to assess their exposure. Finally, educating developers on secure coding practices around cryptographic key management will help prevent similar vulnerabilities in future releases.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in running-elephant Datart up to 1.0.0-rc3. Affected by this issue is the function getTokensecret of the file datart/security/src/main/java/datart/security/util/AESUtil.java of the component API. The manipulation leads to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations using running-elephant Datart versions 1.0.0-rc1 to 1.0.0-rc3, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data or services protected by the compromised cryptographic keys. Since Datart is used for data analytics and visualization, the exposure of token secrets could allow attackers to impersonate legitimate users or decrypt sensitive business intelligence data. This could result in confidentiality breaches, potentially exposing proprietary or personal data, which would have compliance implications under GDPR. However, the low CVSS score and high attack complexity suggest that the risk of widespread exploitation is limited. Organizations with high-value data or those operating in regulated sectors (finance, healthcare, government) may face greater risks if attackers succeed in exploiting this vulnerability. The lack of known active exploits reduces immediate threat levels but does not eliminate future risk, especially if attackers develop more effective exploitation techniques. Additionally, the vulnerability could be leveraged as part of a multi-stage attack chain, increasing its potential impact in targeted attacks against European enterprises.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…