VulnerabilityPublished 25 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-36134: IBM Sterling B2B Integrator · CWE-1275

Affects IBM Sterling B2B IntegratorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: 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 25 Nov 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 =6.0.0.0 =6.2.0.0 =6.2.1.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately review and update the cookie configurations in IBM Sterling B2B Integrator and File Gateway to ensure that the SameSite attribute is set to 'Strict' or at least 'Lax' for all sensitive cookies. This change limits cookie transmission in cross-site requests and mitigates the risk of information leakage. Monitoring and logging of unusual cross-site requests should be enhanced to detect potential exploitation attempts. Since no patches are currently linked, organizations should stay alert for vendor advisories and apply any forthcoming updates promptly. Additionally, implementing web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules to detect and block suspicious cross-site traffic can provide an additional layer of defense. Regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on session management and cookie security will help identify residual risks. Finally, educating developers and administrators about secure cookie handling best practices is critical to prevent similar issues.

Description

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator and IBM Sterling File Gateway 6.0.0.0 through 6.1.2.7 and 6.2.0.0 through 6.2.0.5 and 6.2.1.1 could disclose sensitive information due to a missing or insecure SameSite attribute for a sensitive cookie.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could lead to the unintended disclosure of sensitive session or authentication information through cookies in cross-site scenarios. This may enable attackers to hijack sessions or gain unauthorized access to B2B integration platforms, potentially disrupting business communications or exposing confidential data exchanged with partners. While the direct impact is limited due to the low severity and lack of known exploits, organizations relying heavily on IBM Sterling products for critical supply chain or financial transactions could face increased risks if attackers leverage this weakness in conjunction with other vulnerabilities or social engineering. The confidentiality breach could undermine trust with business partners and lead to regulatory compliance issues under GDPR if personal or sensitive data is exposed. However, the absence of integrity or availability impact reduces the likelihood of direct operational disruptions or data manipulation.

CWE-1275Sensitive Cookie with Improper SameSite Attribute (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The SameSite attribute for sensitive cookies is not set, or an insecure value is used.
Implementation
Set the SameSite attribute of a sensitive cookie to 'Lax' or 'Strict'. This instructs the browser to apply this cookie only to same-domain requests, which provides a good Defense in Depth against CSRF attacks.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Session Management (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.14.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7252210 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Nov 2025, 15:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1275

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats