CVE-2025-49852VulnerabilityPublished 24 Jun 2025Updated 27 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-49852: ControlID iDSecure On-premises · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects ControlID iDSecure On-premisesSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
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: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: 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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
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 24 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 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
ControlID iDSecure On-premises	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate Network Segmentation: Restrict network access to the iDSecure On-premises server to trusted management networks only, blocking all unnecessary inbound and outbound traffic to reduce exposure. 2. Implement Strict Egress Filtering: Configure firewalls to limit the server’s ability to make outbound HTTP/HTTPS requests to only essential destinations, preventing SSRF exploitation from reaching internal or external targets. 3. Monitor Network Traffic: Deploy IDS/IPS solutions to detect anomalous outbound requests originating from the iDSecure server that could indicate SSRF exploitation attempts. 4. Apply Vendor Patches Promptly: Although no patches are currently available, organizations should prioritize applying updates as soon as ControlID releases a fix. 5. Conduct Internal Audits: Review and harden the configuration of the iDSecure system, disabling any unnecessary features or services that could be leveraged in SSRF attacks. 6. Use Web Application Firewalls (WAF): If applicable, deploy WAF rules to detect and block SSRF attack patterns targeting the iDSecure interface. 7. Incident Response Preparedness: Prepare for potential exploitation by establishing monitoring and response plans specific to SSRF indicators and ControlID product logs. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on network-level controls and proactive monitoring tailored to the nature of SSRF in an on-premises security management system.

Description

ControlID iDSecure On-premises versions 4.7.48.0 and prior are vulnerable to a server-side request forgery vulnerability which could allow an unauthenticated attacker to retrieve information from other servers.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this SSRF vulnerability can be significant, especially for those relying on ControlID iDSecure On-premises for physical access control and identity management. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive internal network information, potentially exposing internal services, configuration data, or other protected resources. This could facilitate further lateral movement or targeted attacks within the network. Given that the vulnerability requires no authentication and no user interaction, attackers could remotely exploit exposed instances, increasing the risk of data breaches or espionage. Organizations in sectors with stringent security requirements such as government, critical infrastructure, finance, and manufacturing could face regulatory and operational consequences if sensitive information is leaked. Additionally, the on-premises nature of the product means that internal network segmentation and firewall policies are critical; misconfigurations could exacerbate the risk. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive defense, but the high CVSS score indicates that once exploited, the impact could be severe.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-25-175-05 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Jun 2025, 19:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats