CVE-2025-15105VulnerabilityPublished 27 Dec 2025Updated 29 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-15105: getmaxun maxun · Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key

Affects getmaxun maxunSource 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: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% 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 27 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
npmgetmaxun/maxun`pkg:npm/getmaxun/maxun`Other threats	Affected <=0.0.28	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

2) Implement network-level access controls to restrict exposure of the vulnerable authentication endpoint, limiting it to trusted internal networks or VPNs. 3) Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious manipulation of the api_key parameter. 4) Where possible, replace or override the hard-coded cryptographic key with a securely generated, unique key per deployment, or disable the vulnerable authentication route if feasible. 5) Monitor logs for unusual authentication attempts or anomalies related to api_key usage. 6) Plan migration to alternative, secure authentication solutions or await vendor patches while maintaining heightened monitoring. 7) Educate developers and security teams about the risks of hard-coded keys and enforce secure coding practices to prevent similar issues. 8) Conduct penetration testing focused on authentication bypass attempts to validate mitigations.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in getmaxun maxun up to 0.0.28. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /getmaxun/maxun/blob/develop/server/src/routes/auth.ts. Performing manipulation of the argument api_key results in use of hard-coded cryptographic key . Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitability is considered difficult. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations using getmaxun maxun, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized access due to compromised cryptographic protections in authentication mechanisms. Confidentiality of sensitive data or API communications could be breached if attackers successfully exploit the hard-coded key. Although the attack complexity is high and no widespread exploitation is currently known, the public availability of the exploit increases risk over time. Organizations relying on maxun for critical authentication or API security may face data leakage or unauthorized system access, potentially impacting compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The lack of vendor response and patches further exacerbates the risk, requiring organizations to implement compensating controls. The impact is primarily on confidentiality, with no direct integrity or availability effects reported. However, unauthorized access could lead to secondary impacts depending on the environment and data handled.

Summary

CVE-2025-15105 identifies a security vulnerability in the getmaxun maxun software product, specifically in versions 0.0.1 through 0.0.28. The flaw resides in the authentication route implemented in the file /getmaxun/maxun/blob/develop/server/src/routes/auth.ts, where a hard-coded cryptographic key is used. This improper use of a static key undermines cryptographic security by allowing attackers to manipulate the api_key argument remotely, potentially bypassing authentication or gaining unauthorized access. The vulnerability does not require any privileges or user interaction, but the attack complexity is high, indicating that exploitation demands significant skill or conditions. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 6.3 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, high complexity, no privileges required, no user interaction, and limited confidentiality impact. The vendor was notified early but has not issued a patch or response, and no known exploits have been observed in the wild. Given the nature of the flaw, attackers could leverage the hard-coded key to decrypt or forge authentication tokens or API requests, compromising confidentiality of sensitive data or access controls. The vulnerability affects all listed versions up to 0.0.28, indicating a long-standing issue in the product's cryptographic implementation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Jan 2026, 22:58 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats