CVE-2025-15341VulnerabilityPublished 5 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-15341: Tanium Benchmark · Incorrect Default Permissions

Affects Tanium BenchmarkSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium · fixed in 2.12.82 : update Tanium Benchmark when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 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 27% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.12.82, 2.9.188, 2.7.98

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 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

Upgrade Tanium Benchmark to 2.12.82, 2.9.188 or 2.7.98.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
TaniumBenchmark	Affected >=2.7.0 <2.7.98 >=2.9.0 <2.9.188 >=2.12.0 <2.12.82	Fixed in 2.12.82 2.9.188 2.7.98

CPE configurations (3)

cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_benchmark:2.7.97:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_benchmark:2.9.187:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:a:tanium:service_benchmark:2.12.81:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

1. Apply vendor patches promptly once available to correct the default permission settings in Tanium Benchmark. 2. Conduct a thorough audit of user and administrative permissions within the Tanium Benchmark environment to ensure the principle of least privilege is enforced. 3. Restrict access to Tanium Benchmark management interfaces to a minimal set of trusted administrators and monitor privileged account activity closely. 4. Implement network segmentation and access controls to limit remote access to Tanium Benchmark servers. 5. Use multi-factor authentication for all privileged accounts to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 6. Regularly review and update security policies related to endpoint management tools to detect and respond to unusual access patterns. 7. Engage in proactive threat hunting and monitoring for signs of misuse of privileged accounts or attempts to exploit permission weaknesses.

Description

Tanium addressed an incorrect default permissions vulnerability in Benchmark.

Impact

For European organizations, the vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive security and endpoint management data. Since Tanium Benchmark is often deployed in large enterprises and critical infrastructure sectors, unauthorized access could lead to exposure of security configurations, audit data, or benchmarking results, which attackers could leverage for further attacks or espionage. The requirement for privileged authentication limits the attack surface to insiders or compromised privileged accounts, but the remote network attack vector increases risk if such credentials are obtained. The lack of impact on availability reduces the likelihood of service disruption but does not diminish the potential damage from data compromise. European organizations in finance, energy, healthcare, and government sectors using affected versions should consider this vulnerability a significant risk to their security monitoring and compliance capabilities.

References

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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…