CVE-2025-11287VulnerabilityPublished 5 Oct 2025Updated 7 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11287: samanhappy MCPHub · Improper Authentication

Affects samanhappy MCPHubSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 46% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
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.
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 5 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 2026-10-26.

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
samanhappy MCPHub	Affected =0.9.0 =0.9.1 =0.9.2 =0.9.3 =0.9.4 =0.9.5 =0.9.6 =0.9.7 =0.9.8 =0.9.9 =0.9.10	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

These include: 1) Restricting network access to MCPHub services using firewalls or network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted hosts only. 2) Deploying additional authentication or access control mechanisms in front of MCPHub, such as reverse proxies with authentication enforcement or VPN requirements. 3) Monitoring network traffic and logs for unusual SSE connection attempts or unauthorized access patterns. 4) Conducting thorough audits of MCPHub deployments to identify and isolate vulnerable instances. 5) Implementing anomaly detection systems to flag suspicious behavior related to device management or data streams. 6) Preparing incident response plans specific to MCPHub compromise scenarios. 7) Engaging with the vendor or community for updates and potential unofficial patches or workarounds. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on network-level controls and active monitoring tailored to the nature of the vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability was identified in samanhappy MCPHub up to 0.9.10. This vulnerability affects the function handleSseConnectionfunction of the file src/services/sseService.ts. Such manipulation leads to improper authentication. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to operational continuity and data security, especially in sectors relying on MCPHub for device management or real-time monitoring, such as manufacturing, utilities, and smart infrastructure. Unauthorized access could lead to exposure of sensitive operational data, manipulation of device states causing process disruptions, or denial of service conditions. The lack of vendor response and patches increases the window of exposure. Organizations with MCPHub deployments in critical infrastructure or industrial control systems face heightened risk of targeted attacks aiming to disrupt services or steal intellectual property. Additionally, the vulnerability could be leveraged as a foothold for lateral movement within networks. The medium severity rating reflects the balance between the ease of exploitation and partial impact on system security, but the real-world impact could escalate depending on the deployment context and attacker objectives.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Oct 2025, 07:14 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats