CVE-2025-2138VulnerabilityPublished 12 Oct 2025Updated 14 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-2138: IBM Engineering Requirements Management Doors Next · Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security

Affects IBM Engineering Requirements Management Doors NextSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.5 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.5Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 12 Oct 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
IBM Engineering Requirements Management Doors Next	Affected =7.0.2 =7.0.3 =7.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-2138, European organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Restrict user permissions in IBM Doors Next to the minimum necessary, ensuring that only trusted users have comment deletion rights. 2) Monitor and audit comment deletion activities regularly to detect unauthorized or suspicious behavior promptly. 3) Enforce strong authentication mechanisms, including multi-factor authentication, to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 4) Isolate IBM Doors Next environments within secure network segments to limit exposure to unauthorized network users. 5) Engage with IBM support channels to obtain updates or patches as soon as they become available and plan for timely deployment. 6) Educate users about the risks of credential sharing and the importance of reporting unusual application behavior. 7) Consider implementing additional server-side validation or proxy controls if possible to enforce comment deletion policies robustly. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on access control tightening, monitoring, and proactive engagement with the vendor.

Description

IBM Engineering Requirements Management Doors Next 7.0.2, 7.0.3, and 7.1 could allow an authenticated user on the network to delete comments from other users due to client-side enforcement of server-side security.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-2138 lies in the potential compromise of data integrity within IBM Doors Next environments. Unauthorized deletion of comments can disrupt project documentation, traceability, and collaboration workflows, potentially leading to misunderstandings, loss of critical feedback, or audit trail gaps. This is particularly significant for industries with strict regulatory compliance requirements such as aerospace, automotive, and defense sectors prevalent in Europe, where requirements management tools are critical for product development and certification. Although the vulnerability does not expose sensitive data or cause service outages, the integrity compromise could indirectly affect decision-making and compliance reporting. Since exploitation requires authentication, the threat is limited to insiders or compromised user accounts, emphasizing the importance of strong access controls and monitoring. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for future attacks, especially in environments with multiple users and collaborative workflows.

CWE-602Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product is composed of a server that relies on the client to implement a mechanism that is intended to protect the server.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely.
Architecture and Design
If some degree of trust is required between the two entities, then use integrity checking and strong authentication to ensure that the inputs are coming from a trusted source.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Manipulating Hidden Fields (opens in a new tab)
Create Malicious Client (opens in a new tab)
Removing Important Client Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Removing/short-circuiting 'Purse' logic: removing/mutating 'cash' decrements (opens in a new tab)
Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7247716 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Oct 2025, 01:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-602

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats