CVE-2025-36228VulnerabilityPublished 26 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-36228: IBM Aspera Faspex 5 · Incorrect Execution-Assigned Permissions

Affects IBM Aspera Faspex 5Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.8 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.8Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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 26 Dec 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 Aspera Faspex 5	Affected =5.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Conduct a thorough audit of user permissions within IBM Aspera Faspex 5, ensuring that only necessary users have high-level privileges. 2. Implement strict role-based access controls (RBAC) and regularly review roles to minimize privilege creep. 3. Monitor backend API access logs for any unusual or unauthorized feature usage that contradicts the user interface permissions. 4. Until IBM releases an official patch, consider restricting access to the Faspex backend API to trusted network segments or VPNs to reduce exposure. 5. Educate privileged users about the risks of misuse and enforce strong authentication mechanisms, including multi-factor authentication (MFA), to reduce the risk of account compromise. 6. Prepare to deploy patches promptly once IBM provides them and test updates in a controlled environment before production rollout. 7. Integrate Faspex monitoring with SIEM solutions to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts.

Description

IBM Aspera Faspex 5 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.1 may allow inconsistent permissions between the user interface and backend API allowed users to access features that appeared disabled, potentially leading to misuse.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-36228 lies in the potential misuse of IBM Aspera Faspex 5 features by users who already have elevated privileges. This could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data or modification of transfer configurations, undermining data confidentiality and integrity. Since Aspera Faspex is often used for large-scale, high-speed file transfers in industries such as media, finance, and government, misuse could disrupt secure data workflows or expose sensitive information. However, the requirement for high privileges limits the threat to insider misuse or compromised privileged accounts rather than external attackers. The absence of availability impact reduces the risk of service disruption. European organizations relying on Aspera Faspex for critical data transfers should be aware that this vulnerability could be exploited internally or by attackers who have escalated privileges, potentially leading to compliance issues under GDPR if sensitive data is exposed or mishandled.

CWE-279Incorrect Execution-Assigned Permissions (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
While it is executing, the product sets the permissions of an object in a way that violates the intended permissions that have been specified by the user.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
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)
Attack patterns
Web Server Logs Tampering (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7255331 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Dec 2025, 14:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-279

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats