CVE-2025-30477VulnerabilityPublished 21 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-30477: Dell PowerScale OneFS · Weak Cryptography

Affects Dell PowerScale OneFSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.4 Medium : upgrade to 9.11.0.0 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.11.0.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: 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: 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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 21 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 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

Upgrade dell/powerscale-onefs to 9.11.0.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Delldell/powerscale-onefs`pkg:rpm/dell/powerscale-onefs`Other threats	Affected <9.11.0.0	Fixed in 9.11.0.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability effectively, European organizations should: 1) Prioritize upgrading Dell PowerScale OneFS to version 9.11.0.0 or later as soon as the patch becomes available, ensuring the replacement of the broken cryptographic algorithm with a secure alternative. 2) Conduct thorough privilege audits and tighten access controls to minimize the number of users with high-level privileges, reducing the attack surface. 3) Implement network segmentation and strict firewall rules to limit remote access to management interfaces of PowerScale systems. 4) Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual access patterns or data exfiltration attempts that could indicate exploitation attempts. 5) Employ data encryption at rest and in transit using independent, validated cryptographic solutions where possible, adding defense-in-depth beyond the vulnerable built-in algorithms. 6) Train security teams to recognize signs of privilege escalation and cryptographic misuse. 7) Engage with Dell support and subscribe to security advisories to stay informed about patches and mitigation updates. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on privilege management, network controls, and layered encryption strategies tailored to the specific nature of this vulnerability.

Description

Dell PowerScale OneFS, versions prior to 9.11.0.0, contains a use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be significant, especially for industries relying heavily on data confidentiality such as finance, healthcare, government, and telecommunications. PowerScale OneFS is often deployed in data centers and cloud environments where large volumes of sensitive data are stored and accessed. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, intellectual property, or personal data protected under GDPR, resulting in regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Since the vulnerability requires high privileges, the risk is somewhat mitigated by existing access controls; however, if an attacker can escalate privileges or gain administrative access through other vulnerabilities or insider threats, this cryptographic weakness could be leveraged to extract sensitive data undetected. The lack of impact on integrity and availability means the system’s operations may continue normally, potentially delaying detection of the breach. European organizations with compliance requirements for strong encryption standards may face challenges ensuring their data protection measures meet legal obligations until the vulnerability is remediated.

CWE-327Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms.
Architecture and Design
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000317419/dsa-2025-192-security-update-for-dell-powerscale-onefs-for-multiple-security-vulnerabilities (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Jul 2025, 17:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-327

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats