CVE-2025-34273VulnerabilityPublished 30 Oct 2025Updated 17 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-34273: Nagios Log Server · Incorrect Authorization

Affects Nagios Log ServerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.1High

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

EPSS: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 63% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 30 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Nagios Log Server	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediately upgrade Nagios Log Server to version 2024R2.0.3 or later, where the authorization checks are properly enforced. 2. Implement strict role-based access control (RBAC) policies to limit dashboard deletion permissions exclusively to trusted administrator accounts. 3. Audit existing user roles and permissions to identify and restrict any non-administrator accounts that currently have elevated privileges. 4. Monitor audit logs for any unusual dashboard deletion activities, especially from lower-privileged users. 5. If upgrading is not immediately possible, consider temporarily disabling global dashboard deletion functionality or restricting access to the dashboard management interface via network segmentation or firewall rules. 6. Educate users about the importance of safeguarding their credentials to prevent misuse by unauthorized actors. 7. Regularly review and update monitoring and alerting configurations to detect potential misuse or anomalous behavior related to dashboard management.

Description

CVE-2025-34273 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in Nagios Log Server versions prior to 2024R2.0.3. It allows non-administrator users to delete global dashboards due to improper enforcement of authorization checks. This flaw can disrupt monitoring visibility for all users by removing shared dashboards critical to organizational operations. The vulnerability requires only low privileges and no user interaction, making exploitation relatively straightforward. Although no known exploits are reported in the wild, the impact on availability and integrity of monitoring data is significant. European organizations relying on Nagios Log Server for centralized log management and monitoring are at risk, especially those with multi-user environments. Mitigation involves upgrading to version 2024R2.0.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability can lead to significant operational disruptions. Nagios Log Server is widely used for centralized log management and monitoring, critical for maintaining IT infrastructure health and compliance with regulations such as GDPR. Unauthorized deletion of global dashboards can impair the ability of security teams and system administrators to monitor systems effectively, increasing the risk of undetected incidents or delayed responses. This can affect sectors with high reliance on continuous monitoring, including finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and critical infrastructure. The integrity and availability of monitoring data are compromised, potentially leading to compliance violations and financial losses. Since the vulnerability requires only low privileges and no user interaction, insider threats or compromised low-privilege accounts could exploit it easily. The absence of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the risk remains high due to the critical nature of the affected component.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (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 24 Nov 2025, 22:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats