CVE-2025-2694VulnerabilityPublished 4 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-2694: IBM Sterling B2B Integrator · XSS or 'Cross-site Scripting'

Affects IBM Sterling B2B IntegratorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 8% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
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: 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: 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 4 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
IBM Sterling B2B Integrator	Affected =6.0.0.0 =6.2.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Restrict privileged user access strictly using the principle of least privilege and enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of account compromise. 2. Monitor and audit privileged user activities within the IBM Sterling B2B Integrator and File Gateway environments to detect anomalous behavior indicative of attempted script injection. 3. Implement web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious script payloads in web UI inputs. 4. Sanitize and validate all user inputs at the application level, ensuring that any embedded scripts or HTML are properly neutralized before rendering. 5. Stay alert for official IBM patches or security advisories addressing CVE-2025-2694 and apply updates promptly once available. 6. Conduct regular security awareness training for privileged users to recognize social engineering attempts that could lead to credential compromise. 7. Employ session management best practices such as short session timeouts and secure cookie attributes to limit the window of opportunity for exploitation. 8. Consider network segmentation to isolate critical B2B integration systems from general user networks, limiting exposure in case of compromise.

Description

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator 6.0.0.0 through 6.1.2.7_1 and 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.0.4 and IBM Sterling File Gateway 6.0.0.0 through 6.1.2.7_1 and 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.0.4 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows a privileged user to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability could be significant, especially for those in sectors relying heavily on secure B2B data exchanges such as manufacturing, logistics, finance, and telecommunications. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of credentials and session data, potentially enabling attackers to escalate privileges or move laterally within the network. This could compromise the integrity of business transactions and disrupt automated workflows, leading to operational delays and financial losses. Additionally, exposure of sensitive partner or customer data could result in regulatory non-compliance under GDPR, leading to legal penalties and reputational damage. Since the vulnerability requires a privileged user to inject malicious scripts, insider threats or compromised privileged accounts pose a higher risk. The medium severity score suggests that while the vulnerability is not trivial, the exploitation complexity and required conditions reduce the likelihood of widespread impact. However, organizations with high-value integrations and complex partner ecosystems should prioritize mitigation to avoid potential cascading effects.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7244023 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Sep 2025, 14:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats