VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-50061: Oracle Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management · Improper Privilege Management

Affects Oracle Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio ManagementSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 15 Jul 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 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
Oracle Corporation Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management	Affected =20.12.0 =21.12.0 =22.12.0 =23.12.0 =24.12.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. 2. Network segmentation: Restrict network access to Primavera P6 EPPM web interfaces to trusted internal networks or VPNs to reduce exposure to external attackers. 3. User awareness training: Since exploitation requires user interaction, conduct targeted training to recognize phishing and social engineering attempts that could trigger the vulnerability. 4. Implement strong access controls: Review and enforce least privilege principles for Primavera P6 users to limit the impact of compromised accounts. 5. Monitor logs and alerts: Enable detailed logging of Primavera P6 access and changes, and set up alerts for unusual activities such as unexpected data modifications or access patterns. 6. Multi-factor authentication (MFA): Enforce MFA for all users accessing Primavera P6 to reduce the risk of credential misuse. 7. Incident response readiness: Prepare response plans specifically for Primavera P6 compromise scenarios, including data integrity verification and recovery procedures. 8. Evaluate integrated products: Assess other Oracle products integrated with Primavera P6 for potential indirect impacts and apply corresponding mitigations.

Description

Vulnerability in the Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management product of Oracle Construction and Engineering (component: Web Access). Supported versions that are affected are 20.12.0-20.12.21, 21.12.0-21.12.21, 22.12.0-22.12.19, 23.12.0-23.12.13 and 24.12.0-24.12.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows low privileged attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Primavera P6 Enterprise Project Portfolio Management accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in construction, engineering, infrastructure, and large-scale project management sectors, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized data access and manipulation within Primavera P6 EPPM environments. Given Primavera's role in managing critical project data, exploitation could lead to compromised project schedules, budget overruns, and loss of sensitive project information. The requirement for user interaction suggests phishing or social engineering vectors could be used to trigger the exploit, increasing the risk of targeted attacks. The scope change indicates that other integrated Oracle products or connected systems might also be impacted, potentially amplifying the damage. Confidentiality impacts, although limited, could expose sensitive project details or intellectual property. Integrity impacts could allow unauthorized changes to project data, leading to erroneous reporting and decision-making. The absence of availability impact reduces the risk of denial-of-service but does not mitigate the risks to data trustworthiness and confidentiality. European organizations with Primavera P6 deployments should be aware of these risks, especially those managing critical infrastructure or government projects where data integrity and confidentiality are paramount.

CWE-269Improper Privilege Management (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that 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
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.
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)
Secure Design Principles (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
Restful Privilege Elevation (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Abuse (opens in a new tab)
Privilege Escalation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2025.html (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Jul 2025, 01:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-269

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats