VulnerabilityPublished 5 Feb 2026Updated 6 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-15327: Tanium Deploy · Missing Authorization

Affects Tanium DeploySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.30.150 or 2.26.1253 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 18% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.30.150, 2.26.1253

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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 impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Feb 2026
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

Upgrade Tanium Deploy to 2.30.150 or 2.26.1253.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
TaniumDeploy	Affected >=2.26.0 <2.26.1253 >=2.30.0 <2.30.150	Fixed in 2.30.150 2.26.1253

CPE configurations (2)

cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_deploy:2.26.1252:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_deploy:2.30.149:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

1. Verify and enforce strict role-based access controls (RBAC) within Tanium Deploy to ensure users have only the minimum necessary privileges. 2. Monitor and audit access logs for unusual or unauthorized activities related to Deploy, focusing on privilege escalation attempts. 3. Segment the network to restrict access to Tanium Deploy management interfaces, limiting exposure to trusted administrators and systems only. 4. 5. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on authorization controls within endpoint management tools. 6. Educate IT and security teams about this vulnerability to ensure prompt detection and response to suspicious activities. 7. Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for accessing Tanium Deploy consoles to add an additional security layer. 8. Review and harden firewall and access control lists (ACLs) to minimize unnecessary network exposure of Tanium Deploy services.

Description

Tanium addressed an improper access controls vulnerability in Deploy.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-15327 lies in potential unauthorized access to sensitive configuration or operational data within Tanium Deploy environments. This could lead to information disclosure that might aid attackers in further reconnaissance or lateral movement within networks. Since Tanium Deploy is used for endpoint management and security operations, any unauthorized access could undermine trust in security controls and complicate incident response efforts. The limited confidentiality impact means that while critical system integrity or availability is not directly threatened, the exposure of sensitive data could have compliance and operational repercussions, especially under GDPR and other data protection regulations prevalent in Europe. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, energy, and government, which rely heavily on endpoint management tools, could face increased risk if this vulnerability is exploited. Additionally, the remote exploitability without user interaction increases the threat surface, particularly in environments with exposed management interfaces or insufficient network segmentation. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for future attacks, emphasizing the need for proactive mitigation.

References

security.tanium.com/TAN-2025-006 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…