CVE-2025-20296VulnerabilityPublished 27 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-20296: Cisco Unified Computing System (Managed) · Cross-site Scripting

Affects Cisco Unified Computing System (Managed)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: 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 on 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 27 Aug 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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate patching: Organizations should monitor Cisco’s official advisories and apply patches or updates as soon as they become available for the affected UCS Manager versions. 2. Role-based access control review: Restrict administrative privileges strictly to necessary personnel and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 3. Input validation enhancements: While waiting for vendor patches, implement web application firewalls (WAFs) or reverse proxies that can detect and block malicious script payloads targeting the UCS Manager interface. 4. Session management hardening: Enforce short session timeouts and secure cookie attributes to minimize the impact of session hijacking attempts. 5. User training and awareness: Educate administrators about the risks of XSS and encourage cautious behavior when interacting with management interfaces. 6. Network segmentation: Isolate management interfaces from general user networks to limit exposure and reduce the attack surface. 7. Continuous monitoring: Deploy security monitoring solutions to detect anomalous activities related to the UCS Manager interface, such as unusual script injections or unauthorized access attempts.

Description

A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco UCS Manager Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to conduct a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the interface. This vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input by the web-based management interface of an affected system. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by injecting malicious data into specific pages of the interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the affected interface or access sensitive, browser-based information. To exploit this vulnerability, the attacker must be a member of the Administrator or AAA Administrator role.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be substantial, especially for enterprises and data centers relying on Cisco UCS for managing their computing infrastructure. Successful exploitation could allow attackers with administrative credentials to execute malicious scripts, potentially leading to session hijacking, unauthorized access to sensitive configuration data, or manipulation of the management interface. This could disrupt IT operations, compromise data confidentiality, and increase the risk of further attacks within the network. Given that the attacker must already have administrative privileges, the vulnerability primarily elevates the risk posed by insider threats or compromised administrator accounts. In sectors such as finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and government within Europe, where Cisco UCS deployments are common, this vulnerability could undermine trust in infrastructure security and lead to regulatory compliance issues under GDPR if sensitive data is exposed. Additionally, the cross-site scripting nature could facilitate lateral movement or pivoting attacks within the network, amplifying the threat landscape for European organizations.

References

sec.cloudapps.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-ucs-xss-Ey6XhyPS (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Aug 2025, 16:49 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats