CVE-2025-48931VulnerabilityPublished 28 May 2025Updated 29 May 2025

CVE-2025-48931: TeleMessage service · Use of Weak Hash

Affects TeleMessage serviceSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.2 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.2Low

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

EPSS: 0.09% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 0% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: 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

European organizations should prioritize the following specific mitigation steps: 1) Immediately audit the TeleMessage service deployments to identify affected versions using MD5 for password hashing. 2) Engage with the vendor to obtain timelines for patches or updates that replace MD5 with a secure password hashing algorithm such as Argon2, bcrypt, or PBKDF2 with appropriate salting and iteration counts. 3) Where possible, implement compensating controls such as enforcing multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the impact of compromised passwords. 4) Conduct password resets for all users of the affected service to invalidate potentially compromised hashes. 5) Monitor logs and network traffic for suspicious activities indicative of credential theft or brute force attempts. 6) Educate users on the importance of unique, strong passwords to mitigate risks from password reuse. 7) If source code or configuration access is available, modify the service to replace MD5 hashing with a secure alternative immediately. 8) Implement strict access controls and encryption for stored password hashes to prevent unauthorized access. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on vendor engagement, proactive password management, and layered security controls tailored to the specific weakness in the TeleMessage service.

Description

The TeleMessage service through 2025-05-05 relies on MD5 for password hashing, which opens up various attack possibilities (including rainbow tables) with low computational effort.

Impact

For European organizations using the TeleMessage service, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality of user credentials. If an attacker gains access to the hashed password database, they could efficiently reverse hashes to obtain plaintext passwords, potentially leading to unauthorized access to user accounts. This risk is heightened in environments where password reuse is common, potentially allowing lateral movement across systems. Although the vulnerability does not directly affect system integrity or availability, compromised credentials can lead to broader security incidents, including data breaches and unauthorized data access. Given the low CVSS score, the immediate risk is limited, but the potential for escalation exists if combined with other vulnerabilities or social engineering attacks. Organizations in sectors with stringent data protection requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and government, may face regulatory and reputational consequences if credential compromise leads to data breaches under GDPR regulations.

CWE-328Use of Weak Hash (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses an algorithm that produces a digest (output value) that does not meet security expectations for a hash function that allows an adversary to reasonably determine the original input (preimage attack), find another input that can produce the same hash (2nd preimage attack), or find multiple inputs that evaluate to the same hash (birthday attack).
Architecture and Design
Use an adaptive hash function that can be configured to change the amount of computational effort needed to compute the hash, such as the number of iterations ("stretching") or the amount of memory required. Some hash functions perform salting automatically.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.3 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Subvert Code-signing Facilities (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, 04:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-328

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats