CVE-2025-11441VulnerabilityPublished 8 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11441: JhumanJ OpnForm · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts

Affects JhumanJ OpnFormSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
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: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 8 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
JhumanJ OpnForm	Affected =1.9.0 =1.9.1 =1.9.2 =1.9.3	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Apply the official patch identified by commit 11e99960e14ca986b1a001a56e7533223d2cfa5b immediately to all affected OpnForm instances. 2. Implement additional rate limiting and lockout mechanisms at the web application firewall (WAF) or reverse proxy level to detect and block excessive authentication attempts regardless of header manipulation. 3. Monitor authentication logs for unusual patterns, such as repeated attempts from varying IP addresses or suspicious X-Forwarded-For header values. 4. Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) on all accounts to reduce the risk of account compromise even if credentials are guessed. 5. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on authentication mechanisms and header validation. 6. Educate security teams about this vulnerability and ensure incident response plans include detection and mitigation steps for brute-force attacks exploiting this flaw. 7. Where possible, restrict or validate the use of X-Forwarded-For headers at the network perimeter to prevent spoofing. 8. Keep all related infrastructure components (e.g., proxies, load balancers) updated to support proper header handling and security controls.

Description

A vulnerability was identified in JhumanJ OpnForm up to 1.9.3. The affected element is an unknown function of the component HTTP Header Handler. The manipulation of the argument X-Forwarded-For leads to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The identifier of the patch is 11e99960e14ca986b1a001a56e7533223d2cfa5b. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized access through brute-force or credential stuffing attacks, potentially compromising sensitive data and systems. Since OpnForm is used for form handling, exploitation could lead to unauthorized submission or retrieval of data, impacting confidentiality and integrity. The improper restriction of authentication attempts could also facilitate account takeover attacks, leading to further lateral movement within networks. The medium severity indicates moderate impact, but the high complexity and lack of widespread exploitation reduce immediate risk. However, organizations in sectors with high regulatory requirements (e.g., finance, healthcare, government) could face compliance issues and reputational damage if exploited. The vulnerability could also be leveraged as a stepping stone for more advanced attacks if combined with other weaknesses. Therefore, European entities using OpnForm should consider this a significant risk, especially if they handle personal data protected under GDPR or other regulations.

Summary

CVE-2025-11441 is a vulnerability identified in the JhumanJ OpnForm product, specifically affecting versions 1.9.0 through 1.9.3. The vulnerability arises from improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts due to inadequate handling of the X-Forwarded-For HTTP header within the HTTP Header Handler component. Attackers can manipulate this header to circumvent rate limiting or lockout mechanisms designed to prevent brute-force attacks on authentication endpoints. This flaw allows remote attackers to perform repeated authentication attempts without triggering protective restrictions, increasing the risk of credential stuffing or password guessing attacks. The attack complexity is high, indicating that exploitation requires detailed knowledge of the system and crafted requests, but no privileges or user interaction are required. The vulnerability has a CVSS 4.0 base score of 6.3, reflecting medium severity, with network attack vector, high attack complexity, and no privileges or user interaction needed. Although a public exploit exists, there are no confirmed reports of active exploitation in the wild. The vendor has released a patch (commit 11e99960e14ca986b1a001a56e7533223d2cfa5b) that addresses the issue by properly restricting authentication attempts and validating the X-Forwarded-For header. Organizations using affected versions of OpnForm should prioritize patching to mitigate the risk. Additional security controls such as enhanced monitoring of authentication attempts, anomaly detection, and network-level rate limiting can further reduce exposure.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Oct 2025, 07:15 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats