VulnerabilityPublished 5 Feb 2026Updated 6 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-15337: Tanium Patch · Incorrect Default Permissions

Affects Tanium PatchSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium · fixed in 3.24.137 : update Tanium Patch when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.24.137, 3.19.232, 3.17.2300

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 Patch to 3.24.137, 3.19.232 or 3.17.2300.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
TaniumPatch	Affected >=3.24.0 <3.24.137	Fixed in 3.24.137
TaniumPatch	Affected >=3.19.0 <3.19.232	Fixed in 3.19.232
TaniumPatch	Affected >=3.17.0 <3.17.2300	Fixed in 3.17.2300

CPE configurations (3)

cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_patch:3.17.2299:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_patch:3.19.231:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_patch:3.24.136:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately verify if they are running affected versions of Tanium Patch (3.17.0, 3.19.0, or 3.24.0) and apply any available patches or updates from Tanium as soon as possible. In the absence of a direct patch link, contacting Tanium support for guidance is recommended. Additionally, review and harden permission settings within the Tanium Patch environment to ensure that default permissions do not grant excessive access rights. Implement strict access controls and limit administrative privileges to only those users who require them. Conduct regular audits of user permissions and monitor for unusual activities that could indicate exploitation attempts. Network segmentation and the use of zero-trust principles can help contain potential breaches. Employ endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools to detect anomalous behavior related to patch management processes. Finally, maintain up-to-date incident response plans that include scenarios involving compromised patch management systems.

Description

Tanium addressed an incorrect default permissions vulnerability in Patch.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-15337 could be significant, especially for those relying on Tanium Patch for endpoint management and patch deployment. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive configuration data or manipulation of patching processes, resulting in compromised system integrity and confidentiality. This could facilitate further lateral movement or privilege escalation within corporate networks. Given the high confidentiality and integrity impact, organizations handling sensitive data, including financial institutions, healthcare providers, and government agencies, could face data breaches or operational disruptions. The lack of availability impact reduces the risk of denial-of-service conditions but does not diminish the threat to data security. The requirement for high privileges limits exploitation to insiders or attackers who have already breached perimeter defenses, but once exploited, the consequences could be severe. European entities with stringent data protection regulations such as GDPR must consider the compliance risks associated with such vulnerabilities.

References

security.tanium.com/TAN-2025-029 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…