CVE-2025-15120VulnerabilityPublished 28 Dec 2025Updated 29 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-15120: JeecgBoot · Improper Authorization

Affects JeecgBootSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.3 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

2.3Low

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:H/AT:N/PR:L/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: Low
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: 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: 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 28 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Mavenorg.jeecg/jeecgboot`pkg:maven/org.jeecg/jeecgboot`Other threats	Affected =3.0 =3.1 =3.2 =3.3 =3.4 =3.5 =3.6 =3.7 =3.8 =3.9.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Given the absence of official patches, European organizations should implement compensating controls to mitigate CVE-2025-15120. First, conduct a thorough audit of access controls and permissions related to the getDeptRoleList API and restrict access to trusted users only. Implement network segmentation to isolate systems running JeecgBoot from untrusted networks and limit exposure of the vulnerable endpoint. Employ strict input validation and parameter filtering at the application or web application firewall (WAF) level to detect and block anomalous departId manipulations. Monitor logs for unusual access patterns or repeated failed authorization attempts targeting the /sys/sysDepartRole/getDeptRoleList endpoint. If feasible, disable or restrict the use of the affected function until a vendor patch or official fix is available. Educate internal teams about the vulnerability and encourage vigilance for suspicious activity. Finally, maintain an incident response plan that includes this vulnerability as a potential attack vector, ensuring rapid containment if exploitation is detected.

Description

A flaw has been found in JeecgBoot up to 3.9.0. Impacted is the function getDeptRoleList of the file /sys/sysDepartRole/getDeptRoleList. This manipulation of the argument departId causes improper authorization. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitability is considered difficult. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-15120 is primarily related to unauthorized disclosure of internal role and department information, which could facilitate lateral movement or privilege escalation in complex attack scenarios. While the direct impact on confidentiality is limited, the exposure of role lists can provide attackers with valuable intelligence about organizational structure and access controls. This may be particularly sensitive for sectors with strict data protection requirements such as finance, healthcare, and government. The difficulty of exploitation and the need for low-level privileges reduce the immediate risk, but the lack of vendor response and patches increases the window of exposure. Organizations relying on JeecgBoot for internal role management or departmental access control should consider this vulnerability a potential risk vector that could be leveraged in multi-stage attacks. The absence of known active exploitation reduces urgency but does not eliminate the threat, especially in targeted attacks against critical infrastructure or sensitive data environments.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 30 Dec 2025, 23:33 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats