CVE-2025-10986VulnerabilityPublished 14 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-10986: Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile · Path Traversal

Affects Ivanti Endpoint Manager MobileSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.7 Medium : upgrade to 12.6.0.2 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.7Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 49% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 12.6.0.2

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

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

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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: 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 on the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Oct 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile to 12.6.0.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile	Affected <12.6.0.2 =12.5.0.4 =12.4.0.4	Fixed in 12.6.0.2

AI-suggested

1. Apply vendor-provided patches immediately once available for Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile versions prior to 12.6.0.2, 12.5.0.4, and 12.4.0.4. 2. Restrict admin panel access strictly to trusted personnel and enforce multi-factor authentication to reduce risk of credential compromise. 3. Implement robust monitoring and alerting on file system changes within the EPMM server environment, focusing on unexpected writes outside normal directories. 4. Conduct regular audits of admin account activities and review logs for suspicious behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Employ network segmentation to isolate management interfaces from general user networks, limiting exposure. 6. Use application whitelisting or file integrity monitoring tools to detect unauthorized file modifications. 7. Educate administrators on the risks of credential sharing and phishing attacks that could lead to admin account compromise. 8. Prepare incident response plans specific to endpoint management system compromise scenarios. These targeted steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on access control, monitoring, and rapid patch deployment tailored to the nature of this path traversal vulnerability.

Description

Path traversal in the admin panel of Ivanti EPMM before version 12.6.0.2, 12.5.0.4, and 12.4.0.4 allows a remote authenticated attacker with admin privileges to write data in unintended locations on disk.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to the integrity and availability of systems managed via Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile. Unauthorized file writes could lead to configuration tampering, deployment of malicious payloads, or service disruptions impacting endpoint management operations. Confidentiality impact is limited but possible if sensitive files are overwritten or replaced. The requirement for admin authentication reduces the likelihood of external attackers exploiting this flaw directly; however, insider threats or compromised admin credentials could enable exploitation. Organizations relying heavily on Ivanti EPMM for mobile device management, especially in sectors like finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, may face operational disruptions or compliance issues if exploited. The absence of known exploits suggests a window for proactive mitigation. Failure to address this vulnerability could result in unauthorized changes to endpoint configurations, potentially cascading into broader network compromise or data loss.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

forums.ivanti.com/s/article/Security-Advisory-Endpoint-Manager-Mobile-EPMM-10-2025-Multiple-CVEs?language=en_US (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Oct 2025, 14:47 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats