CVE-2025-10395VulnerabilityPublished 14 Sep 2025Updated 15 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10395: Magicblack MacCMS · Server-Side Request Forgery

Affects Magicblack MacCMSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

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

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: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
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: 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 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
Magicblack MacCMS	Affected =2025.1000.4050	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Given the absence of official patches, European organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Restrict access to the Scheduled Task Handler component and the col_url function to only trusted administrators and internal networks to reduce the risk of exploitation by unauthorized users. 2) Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the 'cjurl' parameter to prevent manipulation and ensure only allowed URLs or domains can be requested. 3) Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit the server's ability to make outbound requests to sensitive internal resources or external untrusted networks. 4) Monitor and log all outgoing requests initiated by the MacCMS server, focusing on unusual or unexpected destinations that could indicate exploitation attempts. 5) Conduct regular privilege audits to ensure that only necessary users have high-level permissions required to exploit this vulnerability. 6) Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block SSRF attack patterns targeting the col_url parameter. 7) Stay alert for vendor updates or patches addressing this vulnerability and plan prompt deployment once available.

Description

A vulnerability was found in Magicblack MacCMS 2025.1000.4050. Affected by this vulnerability is the function col_url of the component Scheduled Task Handler. Performing manipulation of the argument cjurl results in server-side request forgery. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely.

Impact

For European organizations using Magicblack MacCMS 2025.1000.4050, this SSRF vulnerability poses a moderate risk. Attackers with high privileges could exploit this flaw to perform unauthorized internal network scanning, access internal-only services, or exfiltrate data by making the server act as a proxy. This could lead to exposure of sensitive internal resources, including databases, internal APIs, or cloud metadata services, which may contain confidential information. The medium severity rating reflects the requirement for elevated privileges, which somewhat limits the attack surface but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments where privilege escalation or insider threats are possible. The impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is low to moderate but could be escalated if combined with other vulnerabilities or misconfigurations. European organizations in sectors such as media, content management, or digital publishing that rely on MacCMS for content delivery or management could face operational disruptions or data breaches if exploited. Additionally, regulatory frameworks like GDPR impose strict data protection requirements, and exploitation leading to data exposure could result in legal and financial consequences.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 22 Sep 2025, 00:32 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats