VulnerabilityPublished 30 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-15264: FeehiCMS · Server-Side Request Forgery

Affects FeehiCMSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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: None
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: 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: 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 30 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 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 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
FeehiCMS	Affected =2.1.0 =2.1.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit their web infrastructure to identify any deployments of FeehiCMS versions 2.1.0 or 2.1.1. If found, they should consider the following specific actions: 1) Disable or restrict access to the TimThumb component, especially the frontend/web/timthumb.php endpoint, until a patch or official fix is available. 2) Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the 'src' parameter at the web application firewall (WAF) or reverse proxy level to block suspicious or unexpected URLs, particularly those targeting internal IP ranges or localhost addresses. 3) Employ network segmentation and egress filtering to limit the web server's ability to make arbitrary outbound HTTP requests, reducing SSRF impact. 4) Monitor web server logs for unusual outbound requests or access patterns to the vulnerable endpoint. 5) Consider deploying runtime application self-protection (RASP) tools that can detect and block SSRF attempts. 6) Engage with the FeehiCMS community or security forums for updates or unofficial patches. 7) Plan for an upgrade or migration to a secure CMS platform if no timely vendor patch is forthcoming. These measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on immediate containment and layered defense specific to SSRF in FeehiCMS.

Description

A vulnerability was determined in FeehiCMS up to 2.1.1. Impacted is an unknown function of the file frontend/web/timthumb.php of the component TimThumb. Executing manipulation of the argument src can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, exploitation of CVE-2025-15264 could allow attackers to perform SSRF attacks that bypass perimeter defenses, potentially accessing internal services that are not directly exposed to the internet. This can lead to unauthorized data access, internal network reconnaissance, or pivoting to other systems. Confidentiality may be compromised if internal APIs or metadata services are accessed. Integrity and availability impacts are less direct but possible if the attacker leverages SSRF to trigger further attacks or denial-of-service conditions. Organizations running FeehiCMS on public-facing web servers are particularly at risk, especially those in sectors like government, finance, healthcare, or critical infrastructure where internal network confidentiality is paramount. The lack of vendor response and patches increases the window of exposure, requiring proactive mitigation. Additionally, the medium severity rating suggests that while the vulnerability is serious, it does not allow direct code execution or full system compromise without additional conditions.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 30 Dec 2025, 22:29 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats