VulnerabilityPublished 29 May 2025

CVE-2025-45474: maccms10 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.3 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.3High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 29 May 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
n/a n/a	Affected =2025.1000.4047	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit their use of maccms10 version 2025.1000.4047 or related CMS products to identify affected instances. Since no official patches are currently available, organizations should implement strict network segmentation to isolate the CMS servers from sensitive internal resources and restrict outbound HTTP requests from these servers to only trusted endpoints. Employing Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block SSRF patterns targeting email settings can reduce risk. Additionally, input validation and sanitization should be enforced on all parameters related to email configuration to prevent malicious request injection. Monitoring and logging outbound requests from the CMS server will help detect anomalous activity indicative of SSRF exploitation attempts. Organizations should also prepare incident response plans specific to SSRF attacks and stay alert for vendor updates or patches addressing this vulnerability. Finally, consider deploying runtime application self-protection (RASP) solutions that can detect and block SSRF attempts in real time.

Description

maccms10 v2025.1000.4047 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF) in Email Settings.

Impact

For European organizations using maccms10 or similar CMS platforms, this SSRF vulnerability poses significant risks. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to internal network resources, including intranet services, databases, or cloud metadata endpoints, potentially resulting in data leakage or lateral movement within corporate networks. Confidentiality breaches could expose sensitive customer or business data, while integrity impacts might allow attackers to alter email configurations or other critical settings, disrupting communications. Availability could also be affected if attackers leverage the SSRF to trigger denial-of-service conditions on internal services. Given the increasing reliance on cloud infrastructure and the integration of CMS platforms in business operations across Europe, this vulnerability could facilitate espionage, data theft, or sabotage, especially in sectors like finance, healthcare, and government. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the vulnerability's ease of exploitation and network accessibility make it a pressing concern.

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

yuque.com/morysummer/vx41bz/ptnnp4eema601rvz (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 23:11 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats