CVE-2025-34133VulnerabilityPublished 27 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-34133: Cloud Solutions SAS Wimi Teamwork · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Affects Cloud Solutions SAS Wimi TeamworkSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.0 High : upgrade to 7.38.17 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.0High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 16% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.38.17

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Active
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Active: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a targeted user to perform specific, conscious interactions with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload, or the user’s interactions would actively subvert protection mechanisms which would lead to exploitation of the vulnerability.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 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 2026-10-26.

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

Upgrade Cloud Solutions SAS Wimi Teamwork to 7.38.17.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Cloud Solutions SAS Wimi Teamwork	Affected =0 <7.38.17	Fixed in 7.38.17

AI-suggested

European organizations using Wimi Teamwork should immediately verify their software version and upgrade to version 7.38.17 or later once available. If you cannot patch yet, organizations should implement additional CSRF protections such as enforcing strict same-origin policies, using Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to restrict external content, and educating users to avoid clicking on suspicious links or visiting untrusted websites while authenticated. Network-level controls like web application firewalls (WAFs) can be configured to detect and block suspicious JSON POST requests containing 'csrf_token' fields from untrusted sources. Multi-factor authentication (MFA) should be enforced to reduce the impact of compromised accounts. Regular monitoring of API logs for unusual activity patterns can help detect exploitation attempts early. Finally, organizations should coordinate with Cloud Solutions SAS for timely patch deployment and stay informed about any emerging exploits or advisories.

Description

CVE-2025-34133 is a high-severity Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability affecting Wimi Teamwork versions prior to 7.38.17. The API improperly validates the 'csrf_token' field by only checking its presence, not its value, allowing attackers to craft malicious JSON POST requests that execute with the victim's privileges. Exploitation requires the victim to be authenticated and to interact with a malicious site, potentially enabling account takeover, privilege escalation, or service disruption. No known exploits are currently in the wild. The vulnerability has a CVSS 4.0 score of 7.0, reflecting its high impact and ease of exploitation without authentication. European organizations using Wimi Teamwork should prioritize patching and implement additional CSRF protections to mitigate risk.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a substantial risk to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of collaborative project data and communications. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized data modification, leakage of sensitive information, or disruption of project workflows. This is particularly critical for sectors relying heavily on secure collaboration tools, such as finance, government, healthcare, and critical infrastructure. Attackers could leverage this flaw to escalate privileges within the platform, potentially gaining administrative control or access to confidential projects. The requirement for user interaction (visiting a malicious site) means phishing or social engineering campaigns could be used to trigger exploitation. Given the collaborative nature of Wimi Teamwork, a compromised account could also be used to propagate further attacks within an organization’s network or to external partners. The lack of current known exploits provides a window for mitigation but also a warning that attackers may develop exploits soon.

Summary

CVE-2025-34133 is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability identified in the API of Wimi Teamwork, a collaboration and project management platform developed by Cloud Solutions SAS. The flaw exists because the API accepts any authenticated JSON POST request containing a 'csrf_token' field without validating the token's actual value; it only checks for the presence of the field. This means an attacker can craft a malicious web page that, when visited by an authenticated user, causes the victim's browser to send a forged request with an arbitrary or empty 'csrf_token'. Since the API does not verify the token's correctness, it processes the request with the victim's privileges. This can lead to unauthorized actions such as modifying project data, changing user settings, escalating privileges, or disrupting services. The vulnerability affects all versions prior to 7.38.17, and no patches are currently linked, indicating a need for urgent vendor response. The CVSS 4.0 vector indicates network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, but user interaction is necessary. The impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is high due to the ability to perform privileged actions. Although no known exploits are reported in the wild, the vulnerability's nature makes it a significant risk for organizations relying on Wimi Teamwork for sensitive collaboration.

CWE-352Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Compound weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #3OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
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
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
Architecture and Design
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Domain Search Timing (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Identification (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (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 3 Nov 2025, 16:15 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-352

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats