VulnerabilityPublished 13 Sep 2025Updated 15 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10340: WhatCD Gazelle · Cross-site Scripting

Affects WhatCD GazelleSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
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: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
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: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to 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 13 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should prioritize applying any available patches or updates from the WhatCD Gazelle project, even though specific version information is not disclosed due to the rolling release model. In the absence of an official patch, organizations should implement strict input validation and output encoding on the 'Message' parameter within the change_log.php component to neutralize malicious scripts. Employing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers can help restrict the execution of unauthorized scripts in browsers. Additionally, organizations should conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on XSS vulnerabilities. User education on recognizing phishing attempts and suspicious links can reduce the risk of successful exploitation. Monitoring web application logs for unusual input patterns or error messages related to the change_log.php page can help detect attempted attacks early. Finally, consider implementing web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules tailored to detect and block XSS payloads targeting this specific endpoint.

Description

A vulnerability was determined in WhatCD Gazelle up to 63b337026d49b5cf63ce4be20fdabdc880112fa3. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /sections/tools/managers/change_log.php of the component Commit Message Handler. Executing manipulation of the argument Message can lead to cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product utilizes a rolling release system for continuous delivery, and as such, version information for affected or updated releases is not disclosed.

Impact

For European organizations using WhatCD Gazelle, particularly those managing private torrent or file-sharing communities, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized script execution in users' browsers. This may result in session hijacking, credential theft, or unauthorized actions performed under the guise of legitimate users. While the direct impact on critical infrastructure is limited, the compromise of user accounts or leakage of sensitive information could damage organizational reputation and user trust. Additionally, if the platform is used for sharing sensitive or proprietary content, the integrity and confidentiality of that data could be at risk. The medium severity rating suggests that while the vulnerability is not catastrophic, exploitation could facilitate further attacks or social engineering campaigns targeting European users. Given the remote attack vector and low complexity, attackers could exploit this vulnerability at scale if the platform is widely used within European communities.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…