CVE-2025-48925VulnerabilityPublished 28 May 2025Updated 1 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-48925: TeleMessage service · Use of Password Hash Instead of Password for Authentication

Affects TeleMessage serviceSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 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 19% 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 28 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 2026-10-25.

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
TeleMessage service	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should implement the following specific measures: 1) Avoid relying solely on client-side hashing for authentication; instead, enforce server-side hashing with strong, slow hashing algorithms like bcrypt, Argon2, or PBKDF2 combined with unique salts per user. 2) Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of compromised credentials leading to unauthorized access. 3) Monitor network traffic for signs of hash interception or replay attacks, and consider deploying network-level protections such as TLS encryption to protect authentication data in transit. 4) Restrict privileges to minimize the risk of attackers gaining the necessary access to exploit the vulnerability (since PR:L is required). 5) Educate users about the risks of using weak or reused passwords, as MD5 hashes of weak passwords are easier to crack. 6) Engage with TeleMessage to obtain updates or patches and plan for timely deployment once available. 7) Consider alternative secure messaging solutions if immediate remediation is not feasible. 8) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focusing on authentication mechanisms to detect similar weaknesses.

Description

The TeleMessage service through 2025-05-05 relies on the client side (e.g., the TM SGNL app) to do MD5 hashing, and then accepts the hash as the authentication credential.

Impact

For European organizations using the TeleMessage service, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized access to user accounts and potentially sensitive communications. Since the authentication relies on client-side hashing and accepts the hash as the credential, attackers who intercept or steal these hashes can impersonate legitimate users. This can lead to data integrity issues, such as unauthorized message sending or modification, and potential lateral movement within organizational networks if TeleMessage is integrated with other systems. Although confidentiality impact is rated as none in the CVSS vector, the compromise of user accounts can indirectly lead to data exposure depending on the organization's use of the service. The medium severity suggests that while the vulnerability is not critical, it can be exploited with some privileges, implying that insider threats or attackers with limited access could leverage it. European organizations in sectors with high communication security requirements, such as finance, healthcare, or government, could face reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny if this vulnerability is exploited. Additionally, the lack of patches increases exposure duration, emphasizing the need for immediate mitigation.

CWE-836Use of Password Hash Instead of Password for Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product records password hashes in a data store, receives a hash of a password from a client, and compares the supplied hash to the hash obtained from the data store.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Use of Captured Hashes (Pass The Hash) (opens in a new tab)
Use of Known Kerberos Credentials (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

wired.com/story/how-the-signal-knock-off-app-telemessage-got-hacked-in-20-minutes/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 07:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-836

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats