CVE-2025-26515VulnerabilityPublished 19 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-26515: NetApp StorageGRID · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects NetApp StorageGRIDSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: 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 19 Sep 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
NetApp StorageGRID	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should prioritize upgrading NetApp StorageGRID to versions 11.8.0.15 or 11.9.0.8 or later where the vulnerability is patched. If immediate patching is not feasible, enabling Single Sign-on (SSO) or federated authentication mechanisms can reduce exposure by preventing unauthenticated access to management interfaces. Network-level controls should be implemented to restrict access to StorageGRID management endpoints, allowing only trusted internal IP addresses or VPN connections. Deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) or Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) with SSRF detection capabilities can help detect and block malicious SSRF attempts. Regularly auditing user accounts, especially non-federated ones, and enforcing strong password policies and multi-factor authentication (MFA) where possible will limit the impact of any unauthorized password changes. Monitoring logs for unusual password change activities or access patterns on Grid Manager and Tenant Manager accounts is critical for early detection. Finally, organizations should review their incident response plans to include scenarios involving StorageGRID compromise and conduct tabletop exercises to prepare for potential exploitation.

Description

StorageGRID (formerly StorageGRID Webscale) versions prior to 11.8.0.15 and 11.9.0.8 without Single Sign-on enabled are susceptible to a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. Successful exploit could allow an unauthenticated attacker to change the password of any Grid Manager or Tenant Manager non-federated user.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses significant risks especially for those using NetApp StorageGRID in their data centers or cloud environments. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized password changes on critical management accounts, allowing attackers to gain persistent administrative access. This could result in unauthorized data modification, disruption of storage services, and potential exposure of sensitive data managed by StorageGRID. Given the role of StorageGRID in managing large volumes of unstructured data, including backups, archives, and compliance data, the integrity compromise could undermine data trustworthiness and regulatory compliance (e.g., GDPR). Additionally, attackers gaining control over management accounts could pivot to other internal systems, amplifying the impact. The vulnerability’s exploitation does not require authentication or user interaction, increasing the risk of automated or widespread attacks. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and government, which heavily rely on secure and compliant storage solutions, could face severe operational and reputational damage if targeted.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

security.netapp.com/advisory/NTAP-20250910-0002 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Sep 2025, 19:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats