VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jul 2025Updated 16 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-50084: Oracle MySQL Server · Incorrect Authorization

Affects Oracle MySQL ServerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

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
Mavencom.oracle/mysql-server`pkg:maven/com.oracle/mysql-server`Other threats	Affected >=8.0.0 <=8.0.42 >=8.4.0 <=8.4.5 >=9.0.0 <=9.3.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement a multi-layered mitigation strategy beyond generic patching advice. First, restrict network access to MySQL Server instances by enforcing strict firewall rules and network segmentation, limiting exposure to trusted hosts and administrative networks only. Employ strong access controls and monitoring to prevent unauthorized privilege escalation that could enable attackers to reach the high privilege level required for exploitation. Use role-based access control (RBAC) and least privilege principles for database and system accounts. Monitor MySQL server logs and system behavior for signs of abnormal hangs or crashes that could indicate attempted exploitation. Deploy intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) tuned to detect unusual MySQL traffic patterns or repeated connection attempts. Prepare incident response plans specifically addressing MySQL service outages to minimize downtime. Once Oracle releases patches or updates, prioritize their deployment in test and production environments. Additionally, consider implementing high availability (HA) and failover mechanisms for MySQL to reduce the impact of potential DoS conditions. Regularly audit and update MySQL configurations to disable unnecessary protocols or services that could be exploited. Finally, maintain up-to-date backups to ensure rapid recovery in case of service disruption.

Description

Vulnerability in the MySQL Server product of Oracle MySQL (component: Server: Optimizer). Supported versions that are affected are 8.0.0-8.0.42, 8.4.0-8.4.5 and 9.0.0-9.3.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise MySQL Server. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized ability to cause a hang or frequently repeatable crash (complete DOS) of MySQL Server. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 4.9 (Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-50084 is the potential for denial-of-service attacks against MySQL Server instances. Given MySQL's widespread use in web applications, enterprise databases, and cloud services, a successful exploitation could disrupt business-critical services, leading to operational downtime and potential financial losses. Although the vulnerability does not compromise data confidentiality or integrity, the availability impact can affect service level agreements (SLAs), customer trust, and regulatory compliance, especially under frameworks like GDPR where service continuity is important. Organizations relying on MySQL for e-commerce, financial services, healthcare, or public sector applications may face increased risk. The requirement for high privileges limits exploitation to attackers who have already gained significant access, but insider threats or lateral movement by attackers within networks could leverage this vulnerability to cause outages. The lack of known exploits currently reduces immediate risk, but the ease of exploitation once privileges are obtained means organizations should proactively prepare. The multi-protocol network access vector suggests that various network interfaces to MySQL could be targeted, increasing the attack surface in complex network environments.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (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, 01:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats