VulnerabilityPublished 21 Jun 2025Updated 24 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-3629: IBM InfoSphere Information Server · Improper Ownership Management

Affects IBM InfoSphere Information ServerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 21 Jun 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 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 InfoSphere Information Server	Affected =11.7.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should implement strict access controls and monitor user activities within IBM InfoSphere Information Server. Specifically, they should: 1) Restrict user permissions to the minimum necessary, ensuring that only authorized personnel can manage or delete comments. 2) Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of compromised credentials being used to exploit this flaw. 3) Enable detailed logging and auditing of comment creation, modification, and deletion events to detect suspicious activities promptly. 4) Regularly review user roles and permissions to prevent privilege creep. 5) Stay alert for IBM’s official patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. 6) Consider implementing compensating controls such as external monitoring or data governance tools that maintain independent records of comments and annotations. 7) Educate users about the importance of safeguarding their credentials and reporting unusual behavior within the platform.

Description

IBM InfoSphere Information Server 11.7.0.0 through 11.7.1.6 could allow an authenticated user to delete another user's comments due to improper ownership management.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability could disrupt internal data governance and collaboration processes, especially in sectors relying heavily on data accuracy and auditability such as finance, healthcare, and public administration. The unauthorized deletion of comments may lead to loss of important contextual information, complicating compliance with regulations like GDPR that require data integrity and traceability. While the vulnerability does not directly expose sensitive data or cause service outages, the integrity compromise could indirectly affect decision-making and regulatory reporting. Organizations with multiple users collaborating on data projects are particularly at risk, as trust in the system's audit trail could be diminished. Additionally, if exploited in a targeted manner, malicious insiders or compromised accounts could manipulate data annotations to mislead or cover unauthorized activities.

CWE-282Improper Ownership Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product assigns the wrong ownership, or does not properly verify the ownership, of an object or resource.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7235496 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Aug 2025, 00:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-282

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats