CVE-2025-2091VulnerabilityPublished 16 Jun 2025Updated 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-2091: M-Files Mobile · Open Redirect

Affects M-Files MobileSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/RE:M/U:Green

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Active
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Supplemental metrics

Vulnerability Response Effort: Moderate
Provider Urgency: Green

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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Active: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a targeted user to perform specific, conscious interactions with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload, or the user’s interactions would actively subvert protection mechanisms which would lead to exploitation of the vulnerability.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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.
Vulnerability Response Effort: Moderate: The actions required to respond to a vulnerability require some effort on behalf of the consumer and could cause minimal service impact to implement. Examples include: simple remote update, disabling of a subsystem, or a low-touch software upgrade such as a driver update.
Provider Urgency: Green: Provider has assessed the impact of this vulnerability as having a reduced urgency.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Jun 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 2026-10-26.

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
M-Files Corporation M-Files Mobile	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately upgrade M-Files Mobile applications on all Android and iOS devices to version 25.6.0 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. Additionally, implement strict email and document scanning policies to detect and block malicious PDFs before they reach end users. User awareness training should emphasize caution when opening PDFs from untrusted or unexpected sources, especially within enterprise mobile environments. Consider deploying mobile threat defense (MTD) solutions that can detect suspicious redirection behaviors or block access to known malicious URLs. Where possible, configure M-Files Mobile and associated systems to restrict or validate URLs before redirection occurs. Monitoring and logging user access patterns for unusual redirection events can help detect exploitation attempts. Finally, coordinate with M-Files support for any additional recommended security configurations or patches.

Description

An open redirection vulnerability in M-Files mobile applications for Android and iOS prior to version 25.6.0 allows attackers to use maliciously crafted PDF files to trick other users into making requests to untrusted URLs.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is on user trust and potential exposure to phishing or malware delivery through trusted enterprise applications. Organizations using M-Files Mobile risk their users being redirected to malicious sites, which could lead to credential theft, unauthorized access, or further compromise of enterprise systems if users are tricked into divulging sensitive information or downloading malware. While the vulnerability does not directly compromise the M-Files Mobile app’s confidentiality or integrity, the indirect effects can be significant, especially in environments where M-Files is used for sensitive document management. The requirement for user interaction limits automated exploitation but does not eliminate risk, particularly in targeted attacks or spear-phishing campaigns. This vulnerability could affect industries relying heavily on M-Files Mobile for document workflows, including finance, healthcare, legal, and government sectors.

CWE-601URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: LowOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
Architecture and Design · Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross-Site Flashing (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Feb 2026, 21:00 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-601

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats