VulnerabilityPublished 31 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11602: neo4j Enterprise Edition · Sensitive Information in Resource Not Removed Before Reuse

Affects neo4j Enterprise EditionSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/V:D/U:Clear

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: Present
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

Supplemental metrics

Value Density: Diffuse
Provider Urgency: Clear

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: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
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.
Value Density: Diffuse: The vulnerable system has limited resources. That is, the resources that the attacker will gain control over with a single exploitation event are relatively small. An example of Diffuse (think: limited) Value Density would be an attack on a single email client vulnerability.
Provider Urgency: Clear: Provider has assessed the impact of this vulnerability as having no urgency (Informational).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 31 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
neo4j Enterprise Edition	Affected =5.26.0 =2025.1.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Restrict network access to Neo4j Bolt protocol endpoints by implementing strict firewall rules and network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted clients only.
Monitor Neo4j vendor communications closely for patches or updates addressing CVE-2025-11602 and apply them promptly once available.
Employ encrypted VPN tunnels or secure network channels for all Neo4j client-server communications to reduce the risk of interception or exploitation.
Conduct regular security audits and memory management reviews in Neo4j deployments to detect potential residual data leaks.
Use application-layer controls to limit the number of concurrent connections and handshake attempts, reducing the attack surface.
Consider deploying intrusion detection systems (IDS) or anomaly detection tools to identify unusual handshake patterns or repeated connection attempts.
If feasible, upgrade to Neo4j versions not affected by this vulnerability once patches are released.
Document and review data classification and handling policies to ensure that any leaked data byte does not expose sensitive information.

Description

Potential information leak in bolt protocol handshake in Neo4j Enterprise and Community editions allows attacker to obtain one byte of information from previous connections. The attacker has no control over the information leaked in server responses.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact is a minor confidentiality breach where an attacker can obtain residual data from previous Neo4j connections. While the leak is limited to one byte and the attacker cannot control the content, this could potentially aid in reconnaissance or be combined with other vulnerabilities to escalate attacks. Organizations relying on Neo4j for critical data processing, such as financial institutions, telecommunications, or government agencies, may face increased risk if the Bolt protocol is exposed to untrusted networks. The vulnerability does not affect data integrity or availability, so direct disruption or data manipulation is unlikely. However, the presence of any information leak in a database system handling sensitive or regulated data (e.g., GDPR-protected personal data) could have compliance implications. The lack of authentication requirement means attackers can attempt exploitation remotely, increasing the threat surface. Overall, the impact is moderate but should not be ignored in high-security environments.

CWE-226Sensitive Information in Resource Not Removed Before Reuse (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product releases a resource such as memory or a file so that it can be made available for reuse, but it does not clear or "zeroize" the information contained in the resource before the product performs a critical state transition or makes the resource available for reuse by other entities.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
During critical state transitions, information not needed in the next state should be removed or overwritten with fixed patterns (such as all 0's) or random data, before the transition to the next state.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
When releasing, de-allocating, or deleting a resource, overwrite its data and relevant metadata with fixed patterns or random data. Be cautious about complex resource types whose underlying representation might be non-contiguous or change at a low level, such as how a file might be split into different chunks on a…
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.6 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Retrieve Embedded Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

neo4j.com/security/cve-2025-11602 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Oct 2025, 10:38 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-226

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats