CVE-2025-11442VulnerabilityPublished 8 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11442: JhumanJ OpnForm · Cross-Site Request Forgery

Affects JhumanJ OpnFormSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 20% 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:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
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: 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: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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: 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

European organizations should implement strict JWT token management policies, including short token lifetimes, secure storage, and regular token rotation to minimize the risk of token theft. Employing additional API security measures such as mutual TLS authentication, IP whitelisting, or rate limiting can further reduce attack surface. Monitoring API usage logs for anomalous or unauthorized requests can help detect exploitation attempts early. Since no official patches are currently available, organizations should consider upgrading to versions beyond 1.9.3 if future releases address this issue or apply custom mitigations such as validating the origin of API requests and enforcing stricter CSRF protections at the application layer. Conducting security audits and penetration testing focused on token handling and API endpoint security is recommended. Finally, educating developers and administrators about secure token practices and the limitations of CSRF protections in token-based authentication contexts is essential.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in JhumanJ OpnForm up to 1.9.3. The impacted element is an unknown function of the component API Endpoint. The manipulation results in cross-site request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. The vendor has stated that API calls require authentication through Authorization Bearer Tokens, so classic CSRF attacks do not apply here. An attacker would need to possess the JWT through means such as XSS which were mitigated, disabling any form of initial access.

Impact

For European organizations using JhumanJ OpnForm versions up to 1.9.3, this vulnerability could allow remote attackers to perform unauthorized API actions if they manage to obtain a valid JWT bearer token. While the direct risk is mitigated by the requirement of token possession and the absence of known exploits, the potential impact includes unauthorized data manipulation or service disruption through API misuse. Confidentiality impact is minimal since the attacker must already have token access, but integrity could be compromised if unauthorized API calls modify data or system state. Availability impact is negligible. The medium severity rating reflects the limited scope and complexity of exploitation. Organizations relying on OpnForm for critical workflows should consider this vulnerability in their risk assessments, especially if token security or session management is weak. The lack of known active exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the need for vigilance.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Oct 2025, 07:51 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats