VulnerabilityPublished 12 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-42943: SAP GUI for Windows · Execution with Unnecessary Privileges

Affects SAP GUI for WindowsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.5Medium

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:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 12 Aug 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

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Restrict developer authorization strictly to trusted personnel and regularly audit these privileges to prevent unauthorized code changes. 2) Monitor and log ABAP code changes and frontend service calls involving UNC paths to detect suspicious activity. 3) Disable or limit the use of automatic NTLM authentication in SAP GUI where feasible, or enforce SMB signing and encryption to protect NTLM hashes in transit. 4) Apply network segmentation to isolate SAP Application Servers and limit exposure of SMB/UNC traffic to trusted zones only. 5) Educate SAP users about the risks of executing untrusted code or services via SAP GUI. 6) Engage with SAP support to obtain patches or workarounds once available and prioritize their deployment. 7) Employ multi-factor authentication and strong password policies to reduce the risk of credential compromise from leaked hashes. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice by focusing on privilege management, network controls, and SAP-specific configurations.

Description

SAP GUI for Windows may allow the leak of NTML hashes when specific ABAP frontend services are called with UNC paths. For a successful attack, the attacker needs developer authorization in a specific Application Server ABAP to make changes in the code, and the victim needs to execute by using SAP GUI for Windows. This could trigger automatic NTLM authentication, potentially exposing hashed credentials to an attacker. As a result, it has a high impact on the confidentiality.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those heavily reliant on SAP ERP systems, this vulnerability poses a significant confidentiality risk. Leaked NTLM hashes can be used by attackers to escalate privileges or move laterally within corporate networks, potentially exposing sensitive business data, financial records, or personal data protected under GDPR. Given SAP's widespread adoption in Europe across sectors such as manufacturing, finance, and public administration, exploitation could lead to data breaches with regulatory and reputational consequences. The requirement for developer authorization limits the attack surface to insiders or compromised developer accounts, but the impact remains critical if exploited. Additionally, the automatic NTLM authentication behavior could expose credentials across internal networks, increasing risk in environments with weak network segmentation. The vulnerability does not affect system integrity or availability directly but undermines trust in credential confidentiality, which can cascade into broader security incidents.

CWE-250Execution with Unnecessary Privileges (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product performs an operation at a privilege level that is higher than the minimum level required, which creates new weaknesses or amplifies the consequences of other weaknesses.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Identify the functionality that requires additional privileges, such as access to privileged operating system resources. Wrap and centralize this functionality if possible, and isolate the privileged code as much as possible from other code.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Identify the functionality that requires additional privileges, such as access to privileged operating system resources. Wrap and centralize this functionality if possible, and isolate the privileged code as much as possible from other code.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Vulnerable Dependency Management (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V14.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
Target Programs with Elevated Privileges (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Aug 2025, 02:51 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-250

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats