CVE-2025-36223VulnerabilityPublished 12 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-36223: IBM OpenPages · Improper Neutralization of HTTP Headers for Scripting Syntax

Affects IBM OpenPagesSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 12 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 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
IBM OpenPages	Affected =9.0 =9.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-36223, organizations should implement multiple layers of defense: 1) Apply vendor patches or updates as soon as they become available to address the root cause of the vulnerability. 2) In the absence of patches, enforce strict input validation and sanitization on HTTP headers, especially the HOST header, at the web server or application gateway level. 3) Deploy and configure Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) to detect and block anomalous or malformed HOST headers and other suspicious HTTP header manipulations. 4) Monitor HTTP traffic logs for unusual patterns indicative of header injection attempts. 5) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on HTTP header injection vectors. 6) Educate development and operations teams about secure coding practices related to HTTP header handling. 7) Restrict access to IBM OpenPages interfaces to trusted networks and authenticated users to reduce exposure. 8) Implement session management best practices to limit the impact of session hijacking, such as secure cookies and session timeouts.

Description

IBM OpenPages 9.0 and 9.1 is vulnerable to HTTP header injection, caused by improper validation of input by the HOST headers. This could allow an attacker to conduct various attacks against the vulnerable system, including cross-site scripting, cache poisoning or session hijacking.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be significant, especially for those in regulated industries such as finance, healthcare, and government sectors that rely on IBM OpenPages for governance, risk, and compliance management. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information (confidentiality impact) and manipulation of data integrity through session hijacking or cache poisoning. This could undermine trust in compliance reporting and risk assessments, potentially leading to regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Although availability is not directly impacted, the indirect effects of compromised sessions or manipulated content could disrupt business operations. The vulnerability's exploitation could also facilitate further attacks within the network, increasing the overall risk posture. European organizations with complex IT environments and integrated compliance systems are particularly vulnerable to cascading effects from such an attack.

CWE-644Improper Neutralization of HTTP Headers for Scripting Syntax (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes web scripting syntax in HTTP headers that can be used by web browser components that can process raw headers, such as Flash.
Architecture and Design
Perform output validation in order to filter/escape/encode unsafe data that is being passed from the server in an HTTP response header.
Architecture and Design
Disable script execution functionality in the clients' browser.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Content Security Policy (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V14.4.6 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7250239 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Nov 2025, 23:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-644

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats