CVE-2025-14695VulnerabilityPublished 15 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-14695: SamuNatsu HaloBot · Dynamically-Managed Code Resources

Affects SamuNatsu HaloBotSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate SamuNatsu HaloBot; no fix will be released.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 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 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: None coming – the product is end of life

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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: Low
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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
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 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 2026-10-25.

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

No fix will be released: SamuNatsu HaloBot is end of life. Replace it, or isolate it from untrusted networks until you can.

AI-suggested

Given the lack of vendor support and patches, European organizations should prioritize discontinuing use of the vulnerable SamuNatsu HaloBot version immediately. If discontinuation is not feasible, isolate affected systems from critical networks and restrict inbound network access to limit remote exploitation opportunities. Implement network-level controls such as firewalls and intrusion detection systems to monitor and block suspicious traffic targeting the html_renderer API endpoints. Conduct thorough audits to identify all instances of the vulnerable bot and remove or replace them with supported alternatives. Employ application-layer filtering or sandboxing to contain potential code execution impacts. Enhance logging and monitoring to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Educate security teams about this specific vulnerability to ensure rapid incident response. Finally, consider deploying endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions capable of identifying unusual code execution patterns related to bot frameworks.

Description

A vulnerability was determined in SamuNatsu HaloBot up to 026b01d4a896d93eaaf9d5163a287dc9f267515b. Affected is the function html_renderer of the file plugins/html_renderer/index.js of the component Inter-plugin API. Executing manipulation of the argument action can lead to dynamically-managed code resources. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-14695 depends on the extent to which SamuNatsu HaloBot is deployed within their infrastructure. Organizations relying on this bot framework for automation, data collection, or operational tasks could face unauthorized code execution risks, leading to data breaches, operational disruption, or lateral movement within networks. The vulnerability's remote exploitability without user interaction or elevated privileges increases the risk of automated attacks. Confidentiality could be compromised if attackers extract sensitive data via the bot, integrity could be undermined by injecting malicious code or commands, and availability could be affected by destabilizing bot operations. Since the product is unsupported, organizations cannot rely on vendor patches, increasing exposure duration. This is particularly concerning for sectors with high automation reliance, such as finance, manufacturing, or critical infrastructure. Additionally, attackers could leverage compromised bots as footholds for broader attacks, including espionage or ransomware campaigns targeting European entities.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…