CVE-2025-4962VulnerabilityPublished 18 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-4962: lunary-ai/lunary · Improper Access Control

Affects lunary-ai/lunarySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High · fixed in 1.9.23 : patch lunary-ai/lunary soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.9.23

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 18 Aug 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 2026-10-26.

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
lunary-ai lunary-ai/lunary	Affected <=0.8.8	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade lunary-ai/lunary installations to version 1.9.23 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until upgrades are possible, implement strict access controls and monitoring on API usage, particularly the `POST /v1/templates` endpoint, to detect anomalous projectId modifications. Enforce least privilege principles to limit user permissions to only projects they own or manage. Conduct thorough audits of project ownership and template creation logs to identify unauthorized activities. Integrate multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce risks from compromised credentials. Additionally, implement Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block suspicious API requests that attempt to manipulate projectId parameters. Educate users about the risks of credential sharing and monitor for insider threat indicators. Finally, coordinate with lunary-ai support for any additional security advisories and best practices.

Description

An Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability was identified in the `POST /v1/templates` endpoint of the Lunary API, affecting versions up to 0.8.8. This vulnerability allows authenticated users to create templates in another user's project by altering the `projectId` query parameter. The root cause of this issue is the absence of server-side validation to ensure that the authenticated user owns the specified `projectId`. The vulnerability has been addressed in version 1.9.23.

Impact

For European organizations using lunary-ai/lunary, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to project data integrity. Unauthorized template creation could lead to data corruption, insertion of malicious templates, or disruption of legitimate workflows, potentially causing operational delays or erroneous outputs. Organizations relying on lunary for critical project management or AI template generation may face internal data integrity issues, undermining trust in the platform. Although confidentiality is not directly compromised, the ability to alter project contents without authorization can have cascading effects on decision-making and compliance, especially in regulated industries such as finance, healthcare, and government sectors prevalent in Europe. The vulnerability requires authenticated access, so insider threats or compromised credentials increase risk. Given the collaborative nature of many European enterprises and the potential for cross-team project sharing, this flaw could be exploited to affect multiple users or departments. The lack of known exploits in the wild provides a window for mitigation, but the high CVSS score indicates that exploitation could have serious consequences if attackers gain access.

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 18 Aug 2025, 14:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats