CVE-2025-11393VulnerabilityPublished 15 Dec 2025Updated 22 Aug 2026

CVE-2025-11393: Red Hat Lightspeed (formerly Insights) for Runtimes 1.0 · Confused Deputy

Affects Red Hat Lightspeed (formerly Insights) for Runtimes 1.0Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Dec 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

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated RHEL 9 container images with backported patches that fix this vulnerability. Users of Red Hat Insights for Runtimes on RHEL 8 container images are advised to upgrade to these updated images and rebuild all dependent container images. As a temporary mitigation, the proxy server can be disabled by adding the environment variable INSIGHTS_ENABLED set to "false" in the Cryostat or JWS subscription YAML. This disables the affected proxy but causes a harmless crash loop in the Insights container. Users should apply all previously released errata relevant to their system before updating. Refer to Red Hat advisory RHSA-2025:23236 for detailed update instructions.

Description

A flaw was found in runtimes-inventory-rhel8-operator. An internal proxy component is incorrectly configured. Because of this flaw, the proxy attaches the cluster's main administrative credentials to any command it receives, instead of only the specific reports it is supposed to handle. This allows a standard user within the cluster to send unauthorized commands to the management platform, effectively acting with the full permissions of the cluster administrator. This could lead to unauthorized changes to the cluster's configuration or status on the Red Hat platform.

Impact

An attacker with standard user privileges within the cluster can exploit this vulnerability to execute commands with the full permissions of the cluster administrator on the Red Hat management platform. This could lead to unauthorized changes to the cluster's configuration or status, potentially compromising cluster integrity and control. The vulnerability does not impact availability but has high confidentiality and integrity impacts.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Aug 2026, 16:42 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats