VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-27889: wftpserver Wing FTP Server · External Control of System or Configuration Setting

Affects wftpserver Wing FTP ServerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.4 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.4Low

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 10 Jul 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
wftpserver Wing FTP Server	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading Wing FTP Server to version 7.4.4 or later once available, as this version addresses the vulnerability. Until a patch is applied, organizations should implement strict input validation and sanitization on the 'url' parameter at the web server or application firewall level to block malicious payloads. User awareness training should emphasize caution when clicking on unsolicited or suspicious links, especially those related to file transfer services. Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) on FTP accounts to reduce the risk posed by leaked passwords. Monitor FTP server logs for unusual access patterns or repeated failed login attempts that could indicate exploitation attempts. Network segmentation can limit the exposure of the FTP server to only trusted users and systems. Additionally, organizations should consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block attempts to exploit this vulnerability. Regular security assessments and penetration testing should include checks for this and similar injection vulnerabilities to ensure comprehensive protection.

Description

Wing FTP Server before 7.4.4 does not properly validate and sanitize the url parameter of the downloadpass.html endpoint, allowing injection of an arbitrary link. If a user clicks a crafted link, this discloses a cleartext password to the attacker.

Impact

For European organizations using Wing FTP Server, this vulnerability poses a confidentiality risk by potentially exposing cleartext passwords to attackers. If exploited, attackers could gain unauthorized access to FTP accounts, leading to data breaches or unauthorized data transfers. Given the low CVSS score and the requirement for user interaction, the immediate risk is limited but should not be ignored, especially in sectors handling sensitive or regulated data such as finance, healthcare, and government. The scope change indicates that the vulnerability could affect multiple components or systems beyond the initial endpoint, increasing the potential impact if combined with other vulnerabilities or social engineering tactics. European organizations with remote or distributed workforces might be more susceptible if users are targeted via phishing campaigns containing the crafted links. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces the urgency but does not eliminate the risk, as attackers could develop exploits once the vulnerability details are public. Failure to address this vulnerability could lead to compliance issues under GDPR if personal or sensitive data is compromised due to unauthorized access facilitated by leaked credentials.

CWE-15External Control of System or Configuration Setting (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A02:2025: Security Misconfiguration (opens in a new tab)
One or more system settings or configuration elements can be externally controlled by a user.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Because setting manipulation covers a diverse set of functions, any attempt at illustrating it will inevitably be incomplete. Rather than searching for a tight-knit relationship between the functions addressed in the setting manipulation category, take a step back and consider the sorts of system values that an…
Implementation · Architecture and Design
In general, do not allow user-provided or otherwise untrusted data to control sensitive values. The leverage that an attacker gains by controlling these values is not always immediately obvious, but do not underestimate the creativity of the attacker.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
XML Schema Poisoning (opens in a new tab)
Manipulate Registry Information (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Registry Run Keys (opens in a new tab)
Schema Poisoning (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 10 Jul 2025, 17:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-15

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats