VulnerabilityPublished 19 Jun 2025Updated 20 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-4661: Brocade Fabric OS · Path Traversal

Affects Brocade Fabric OSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 10% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable system is bound to a protocol stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared proximity (e.g., Bluetooth, NFC, or IEEE 802.11) or logical network (e.g., local IP subnet), or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN within an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 19 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 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
Brocade Fabric OS	Affected >=9.1.0 <=9.2.2	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Restrict and tightly control administrative access to Brocade Fabric OS switches, employing strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) and role-based access controls (RBAC) to minimize the risk of compromised admin credentials.
Monitor and audit all administrative activities on Brocade switches to detect unusual or unauthorized access attempts promptly.
Segregate management networks for SAN switches from general enterprise networks to reduce exposure to potential attackers.
Implement strict file access policies and regularly review configuration files and logs for signs of unauthorized access or tampering.
Coordinate with Brocade (or its current vendor) to obtain and apply patches or firmware updates as soon as they become available to remediate this vulnerability.
Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focusing on SAN infrastructure to identify and mitigate similar path traversal or privilege misuse issues.
Educate administrators on secure handling of credentials and the risks associated with elevated privileges to reduce insider threat risks.

Description

A path transversal vulnerability in Brocade Fabric OS 9.1.0 through 9.2.2 could allow a local admin user to gain access to files outside the intended directory potentially leading to the disclosure of sensitive information. Note: Admin level privilege is required on the switch in order to exploit

Impact

For European organizations, particularly those operating large-scale data centers or enterprises with critical storage infrastructure, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive configuration and operational data within their SAN environments. Since Brocade Fabric OS is widely used in enterprise SAN switches, an attacker with administrative access could leverage this flaw to gain insights into network configurations, potentially aiding further attacks or lateral movement within the network. The impact is primarily confidentiality-related, with limited direct effect on system integrity or availability. However, disclosure of sensitive information could facilitate targeted attacks or compliance violations under GDPR if personal or sensitive data configurations are exposed. Organizations in sectors such as finance, telecommunications, healthcare, and government, which rely heavily on secure storage networks, could be particularly affected. The requirement for admin-level access reduces the risk of external attackers exploiting this vulnerability directly but raises concerns about insider threats or compromised administrative accounts.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

support.broadcom.com/web/ecx/support-content-notification/-/external/content/SecurityAdvisories/0/35814 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Jun 2025, 02:47 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats