CVE-2025-15130VulnerabilityPublished 28 Dec 2025Updated 29 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-15130: shanyu SyCms · Code Injection

Affects shanyu SyCmsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate shanyu SyCms; no fix will be released.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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.
Patch: None coming – the product is end of life

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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: High
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: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
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 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

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should focus on restricting access to the administrative panel by implementing strict network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access only to trusted IPs or VPNs. 2. Enforce strong authentication mechanisms, including multi-factor authentication, to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 3. Conduct thorough audits of user privileges to ensure that only necessary personnel have administrative access. 4. Monitor logs and network traffic for suspicious activity related to the addPost function or unexpected code execution attempts. 5. Given the lack of vendor patches, organizations should plan to migrate away from the unsupported SyCms version to a maintained CMS platform or a supported version if available. 6. Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block code injection patterns targeting the vulnerable function. 7. Regularly back up critical data and test recovery procedures to mitigate impact in case of compromise. 8. Educate internal teams about the risks of this vulnerability and the importance of credential security.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in shanyu SyCms up to a242ef2d194e8bb249dc175e7c49f2c1673ec921. This issue affects the function addPost of the file Application/Admin/Controller/FileManageController.class.php of the component Administrative Panel. The manipulation leads to code injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product adopts a rolling release strategy to maintain continuous delivery The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-15130 depends largely on the presence and use of the affected SyCms versions. Organizations running unsupported versions of SyCms with administrative panels exposed to the network are at risk of remote code execution attacks if an attacker can obtain or already has administrative credentials. This could lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, defacement, or disruption of services. Given the administrative privilege requirement, the threat is more relevant in scenarios where internal threat actors or compromised credentials exist. The lack of vendor support and patches means organizations cannot rely on official fixes, increasing the risk of prolonged exposure. Critical sectors such as government, healthcare, and finance using SyCms may face regulatory and reputational damage if exploited. The medium severity score suggests moderate urgency but does not diminish the potential for serious consequences if exploited in sensitive environments.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…