CVE-2025-42907VulnerabilityPublished 23 Sep 2025Updated 14 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-42907: SAP BI Platform · Server-Side Request Forgery

Affects SAP BI PlatformSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 23 Sep 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
SAP_SE SAP BI Platform	Affected =2025 =2027	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Restrict and monitor access to SAP BI Platform functions that allow modification of LogonToken parameters, ensuring only trusted administrators have such privileges. 2. Implement network segmentation and egress filtering to limit the ability of the SAP BI server to send arbitrary outbound requests, thereby reducing the impact of SSRF attempts. 3. Monitor network traffic logs for unusual outbound ping or HTTP requests originating from SAP BI servers, which could indicate exploitation attempts. 4. Apply SAP security patches and updates promptly once they become available for this vulnerability. 5. Conduct regular audits of user privileges and access controls within SAP BI to minimize the risk of privilege escalation or misuse. 6. Educate users and administrators about the risks of SSRF and the importance of not clicking on suspicious OpenDoc links. 7. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with rules tailored to detect and block SSRF patterns targeting SAP BI Platform endpoints.

Description

SAP BI Platform allows an attacker to modify the IP address of the LogonToken for the OpenDoc. On accessing the modified link in the browser a different server could get the ping request. This has low impact on integrity with no impact on confidentiality and availability of the system.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to the integrity of their SAP BI Platform environments. While it does not directly expose sensitive data or disrupt service availability, the SSRF can be leveraged as a foothold for internal network reconnaissance or to pivot attacks towards other internal resources. Organizations with SAP BI deployments integrated into critical business processes or infrastructure could face indirect risks if attackers use this SSRF to map internal networks or bypass perimeter defenses. The requirement for some level of privileges limits the attack surface to insiders or compromised accounts, but the lack of user interaction needed increases the risk of automated exploitation. Given SAP's widespread use in Europe, especially in countries with large enterprise sectors such as Germany, France, and the UK, the vulnerability could impact a significant number of organizations. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the medium severity score and the potential for internal network abuse warrant proactive mitigation.

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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Oct 2025, 04:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats