VulnerabilityPublished 3 Oct 2025Updated 10 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-52658: HCL Software MyXalytics · Use of Unmaintained Third Party Components

Affects HCL Software MyXalyticsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.5 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.5Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
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: 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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 3 Oct 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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
HCL Software MyXalytics	Affected =6.6	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations using HCL MyXalytics 6.6 should take proactive steps to mitigate this vulnerability beyond generic patching advice. First, conduct a thorough software bill of materials (SBOM) analysis to identify all third-party components and their versions within MyXalytics deployments. Engage with HCL Software to obtain timelines for official patches or updates addressing this issue. Until patches are available, restrict access to MyXalytics instances to only trusted, high-privilege users and implement strict network segmentation to limit exposure. Enhance monitoring and logging around MyXalytics usage to detect anomalous activities indicative of exploitation attempts, especially those requiring user interaction. Conduct user awareness training focused on social engineering risks to reduce the likelihood of successful exploitation. Consider deploying application-layer firewalls or runtime application self-protection (RASP) solutions to detect and block suspicious behavior. Finally, establish incident response plans specific to analytics platform compromises to ensure rapid containment and remediation if exploitation occurs.

Description

HCL MyXalytics is affected by the use of vulnerable/outdated versions which can expose the application to known security risks that could be exploited.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-52658 is primarily related to the potential unauthorized disclosure or alteration of sensitive analytical data processed by MyXalytics. Although the vulnerability is low severity and requires high privileges and user interaction, exploitation could undermine data confidentiality and integrity, affecting decision-making processes and compliance with data protection regulations such as GDPR. Organizations in sectors relying heavily on analytics, such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, may face increased risk if attackers leverage this vulnerability to manipulate or exfiltrate data. The lack of availability impact means operational disruption is unlikely. However, the use of unmaintained components signals a broader risk posture issue that could expose organizations to additional vulnerabilities if not addressed. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not preclude future exploitation, especially as threat actors often target third-party software supply chains. European entities should consider the potential reputational and regulatory consequences of data breaches stemming from such vulnerabilities.

CWE-1104Use of Unmaintained Third Party Components (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A03:2025: Software Supply Chain Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product relies on third-party components that are not actively supported or maintained by the original developer or a trusted proxy for the original developer.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Cheat Sheet Series: Dependency Graph SBOM (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Cheat Sheet Series: Vulnerable Dependency Management (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1021Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The web application does not restrict or incorrectly restricts frame objects or UI layers that belong to another application or domain.
Implementation
The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content.
Implementation
A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed. This is very helpful for legacy browsers that do not support X-Frame-Options security feature previously mentioned.
Implementation
This defense-in-depth technique can be used to prevent the improper usage of frames in web applications. It prioritizes the valid sources of data to be loaded into the application through the usage of declarative policies.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Content Security Policy (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V14.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.7 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Clickjacking (opens in a new tab)
Flash File Overlay (opens in a new tab)
iFrame Overlay (opens in a new tab)
Task Impersonation (opens in a new tab)
Tapjacking (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

support.hcl-software.com/csm?id=kb_article&sysparm_article=KB0124411 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Oct 2025, 19:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1104, CWE-1021

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats