CVE-2025-36085VulnerabilityPublished 28 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-36085: IBM Concert · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects IBM ConcertSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
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: 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: 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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 28 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 Concert	Affected =1.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict network segmentation to limit IBM Concert server access to only necessary internal resources, reducing the potential impact of SSRF exploitation. 2. Enforce strong authentication and access controls on IBM Concert to minimize the risk of attacker access. 3. Apply rigorous input validation and sanitization on any user-controllable parameters that could be used to trigger SSRF requests. 4. Monitor outbound requests from the IBM Concert server for unusual or unauthorized destinations, using network intrusion detection systems or proxy logs. 5. Temporarily disable or restrict features in IBM Concert that allow server-side HTTP requests if feasible until a patch is available. 6. Engage with IBM support to track patch releases and apply updates promptly once available. 7. Conduct internal security assessments and penetration tests focusing on SSRF and lateral movement risks within the environment. 8. Educate administrators and users about the risks of SSRF and the importance of credential security to prevent unauthorized access. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on network controls, monitoring, and operational security tailored to IBM Concert's deployment context.

Description

IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 2.0.0 Software is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks.

Impact

For European organizations, the SSRF vulnerability in IBM Concert could lead to unauthorized internal network reconnaissance, exposing sensitive infrastructure details and potentially enabling attackers to identify and exploit additional vulnerabilities. This can compromise confidentiality by leaking internal IP addresses and services, and integrity by facilitating unauthorized actions within the network. Since IBM Concert is used in enterprise and possibly critical infrastructure sectors, exploitation could disrupt business operations or lead to data breaches. The requirement for authentication limits exposure to insider threats or compromised accounts but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments with weak access controls. The vulnerability could be leveraged as a stepping stone for lateral movement, increasing the attack surface and complicating incident response. Organizations in sectors such as finance, manufacturing, and government within Europe, which rely on IBM products, may face increased risk. The absence of known exploits provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the medium severity score indicates that the threat should be addressed promptly to avoid escalation.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7249356 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Oct 2025, 15:10 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats