VulnerabilityPublished 7 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-54882: himmelblau · Insufficiently Protected Credentials

Affects himmelblauSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High · fixed in 0.9.22 : patch himmelblau soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.1High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.9.22

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

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

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: 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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 7 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 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

AI-suggested

Immediate patching: Upgrade himmelblau to versions 0.9.22 or later (including 1.2.0) where the credential cache permissions are properly restricted.
Access control hardening: Until patches are applied, manually restrict read permissions on the Kerberos credential cache files created by himmelblau so that only the owner has read access. Use OS-level access control lists (ACLs) or file permission commands to enforce this.
Monitor local user activity: Implement enhanced monitoring and alerting for unusual local access patterns or attempts to read credential caches.
Limit local user privileges: Enforce the principle of least privilege to reduce the number of users with local access rights that could exploit this vulnerability.
Network segmentation: Isolate critical systems running himmelblau to limit lateral movement if credentials are compromised.
Incident response readiness: Prepare to investigate and respond to potential credential theft incidents, including Kerberos ticket misuse.
Educate administrators and users about the risk of local credential exposure and the importance of applying updates promptly.

Description

Himmelblau is an interoperability suite for Microsoft Azure Entra ID and Intune. In versions 0.8.0 through 0.9.21 and 1.0.0-beta through 1.1.0, Himmelblau stores the cloud TGT received during logon in the Kerberos credential cache. The created credential cache collection and received credentials are stored as world readable. This is fixed in versions 0.9.22 and 1.2.0. To work around this issue, remove all read access to Himmelblau caches for all users except for owners.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the confidentiality and integrity of authentication credentials within environments using himmelblau for Azure Entra ID and Intune interoperability. Unauthorized local users gaining access to Kerberos TGTs can impersonate legitimate users, potentially accessing sensitive resources and data, leading to data breaches or lateral movement within corporate networks. Given the integration with Microsoft Azure Entra ID and Intune, which are widely used for identity and device management in enterprises, exploitation could undermine trust in identity federation and device compliance enforcement. This is particularly critical for organizations handling sensitive personal data under GDPR, as unauthorized access could lead to regulatory non-compliance and substantial fines. The vulnerability requires local access with limited privileges, so insider threats or attackers who have already compromised a low-privilege account pose the greatest risk. The lack of user interaction needed means exploitation can be automated once local access is obtained. Although no public exploits are known yet, the high impact on confidentiality and integrity warrants urgent attention in European enterprises relying on himmelblau for identity management.

CWE-522Insufficiently Protected Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval.
Architecture and Design
Use an appropriate security mechanism to protect the credentials.
Architecture and Design
Make appropriate use of cryptography to protect the credentials.
Implementation
Use industry standards to protect the credentials (e.g. LDAP, keystore, etc.).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.3 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Session Sidejacking (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Key Theft (opens in a new tab)
Password Recovery Exploitation (opens in a new tab)
Kerberoasting (opens in a new tab)
Modify Existing Service (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Aug 2025, 01:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-522

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats