CVE-2025-36002VulnerabilityPublished 16 Oct 2025Updated 25 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-36002: IBM Sterling B2B Integrator · Password in Configuration File

Affects IBM Sterling B2B IntegratorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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 16 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 2026-10-25.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
IBM Sterling B2B Integrator	Affected =6.2.0.0 =6.2.1.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-36002, organizations should first restrict access permissions on configuration files storing credentials to the minimum necessary users and service accounts, ensuring that only trusted administrators and system processes can read these files. Implement strict local user account management policies, including removing unnecessary local accounts and enforcing strong authentication and authorization controls. Employ endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to monitor for suspicious local file access or privilege escalation attempts. Where possible, isolate systems running IBM Sterling products in segmented network zones with limited user access. Regularly audit file system permissions and review logs for unauthorized access attempts. IBM should be contacted for patches or configuration updates that eliminate plaintext credential storage or encrypt sensitive configuration data. Until patches are available, consider using application-level encryption or vault solutions to store credentials securely outside of configuration files. Additionally, implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for administrative access to reduce the risk of credential misuse. Finally, conduct user awareness training to highlight the risks of local credential exposure and enforce policies against unauthorized local access.

Description

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.0.5, and 6.2.1.0 and IBM Sterling File Gateway 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.0.5, and 6.2.1.0 stores user credentials in configuration files which can be read by a local user.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant confidentiality risk. Exposure of user credentials stored in configuration files could allow attackers or unauthorized local users to access sensitive B2B communication channels, potentially leading to data leakage or unauthorized data manipulation through compromised accounts. While the vulnerability does not directly affect system integrity or availability, the compromise of credentials can enable further attacks such as lateral movement, privilege escalation, or unauthorized access to partner systems. Industries relying heavily on IBM Sterling products for supply chain management, financial transactions, or regulated data exchange—such as manufacturing, finance, and logistics—may face operational disruptions and compliance risks if credential compromise leads to data breaches. Given the local access requirement, the vulnerability is especially impactful in environments with weak endpoint security, insufficient user account segregation, or inadequate monitoring of internal threats. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, as attackers may develop techniques to leverage this vulnerability. European organizations must consider the potential for insider threats or attackers who have already gained limited access to escalate their privileges or move laterally within networks.

CWE-260Password in Configuration File (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A02:2025: Security Misconfiguration (opens in a new tab)
The product stores a password in a configuration file that might be accessible to actors who do not know the password.
Architecture and Design
Avoid storing passwords in easily accessible locations.
Architecture and Design
Consider storing cryptographic hashes of passwords as an alternative to storing in plaintext.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-256Plaintext Storage of a Password (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product stores a password in plaintext within resources such as memory or files.
Architecture and Design
Avoid storing passwords in easily accessible locations.
Architecture and Design
Consider storing cryptographic hashes of passwords as an alternative to storing in plaintext.
A programmer might attempt to remedy the password management problem by obscuring the password with an encoding function, such as base 64 encoding, but this effort does not adequately protect the password because the encoding can be detected and decoded easily.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Forgot Password (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.7.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7248129 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Oct 2025, 03:56 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-260, CWE-256

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats