VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2025Updated 17 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-47222: signserver · Improper Access Control

Affects signserverSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 7.3.2 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:07 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 7.3.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 13 Nov 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

Upgrade com.keyfactor/signserver to 7.3.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Mavencom.keyfactor/signserver`pkg:maven/com.keyfactor/signserver`Other threats	Affected <7.3.2	Fixed in 7.3.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately verify their Keyfactor SignServer versions and upgrade to version 7.3.2 or later where this vulnerability is resolved. In the absence of an official patch, administrators should implement strict input validation and error handling to prevent differential error messages that reveal class existence. Network-level controls such as web application firewalls (WAFs) can be configured to detect and block suspicious requests attempting class path enumeration. Monitoring and logging should be enhanced to detect anomalous access patterns indicative of reconnaissance activities. Additionally, limiting exposure of the SignServer interface to trusted networks and enforcing strong authentication and authorization controls can reduce the attack surface. Regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on error message handling and information disclosure should be conducted to identify similar issues proactively.

Description

A class name enumeration was found in Keyfactor SignServer versions prior to 7.3.2. Setting any chosen class name to any of the properties requiring a class path and the provided class is not expected to return different errors if the class exists in deployment or not. This returns information about the classes loaded in the application or not to the clientside.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability primarily poses a risk of information leakage that can facilitate further attacks. Keyfactor SignServer is used for certificate lifecycle management, digital signing, and cryptographic operations, often within critical infrastructure and regulated industries. Attackers leveraging class enumeration can gain insights into the server's internal architecture, potentially enabling them to identify vulnerable components or misconfigurations. This reconnaissance can lead to more sophisticated attacks such as privilege escalation, code injection, or bypassing security mechanisms. The availability impact is low but present, as malformed requests could potentially cause minor service disruptions. Confidentiality impact is limited to class presence information, but in sensitive environments, even this can be valuable. European entities relying on Keyfactor SignServer for secure certificate management, especially in finance, government, and telecommunications sectors, may face increased risk if this vulnerability is exploited as part of a multi-stage attack.

CWE-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
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
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (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 17 Dec 2025, 20:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats