VulnerabilityPublished 26 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-55272: HCL Aftermarket DPC · -Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor

Affects HCL Aftermarket DPCSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.1 Low.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.1Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 26 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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
HCLAftermarket DPC	Affected =version 1.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Upgrade to the latest version of HCL Aftermarket DPC if available, as newer versions may have addressed the banner disclosure issue.
If an upgrade is not immediately possible, implement network-level controls such as firewalls or intrusion prevention systems to restrict access to the affected service only to trusted users and networks.
Configure the application or underlying services to minimize or suppress banner information and verbose error messages that reveal software versions or system details.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) or reverse proxies that can sanitize or block responses containing sensitive information.
Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests to identify and remediate information disclosure issues.
Monitor network traffic and logs for unusual access patterns or reconnaissance activities targeting the HCL Aftermarket DPC service.
Educate users about the risks of interacting with unsolicited prompts or links that could trigger user interaction-based exploits.
Maintain an up-to-date inventory of software versions and apply security patches promptly when released.
Collaborate with HCL support or security teams for guidance and to obtain patches or workarounds.
Implement defense-in-depth strategies to reduce the impact of any information leakage on overall security posture.

Description

HCL Aftermarket DPC is affected by Banner Disclosure vulnerability where attackers gain insights into the system’s software and version details which would allow them to craft software specific attacks.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-55272 is the reduction of confidentiality due to unauthorized disclosure of system and software version information. While this does not directly compromise system integrity or availability, it increases the attack surface by enabling adversaries to gather intelligence that can facilitate targeted attacks, such as exploiting known vulnerabilities in the disclosed software versions. For organizations, this can lead to increased risk of subsequent exploitation, especially if other vulnerabilities exist in the environment. The requirement for user interaction and high attack complexity limits the ease of exploitation, reducing immediate risk. However, in high-value or sensitive environments, even low-severity information disclosure can be leveraged by advanced persistent threats or sophisticated attackers to escalate attacks. The lack of known exploits in the wild currently limits active threat, but the public disclosure means attackers may develop exploits over time. Organizations relying on HCL Aftermarket DPC version 1.0.0 should consider this vulnerability as a factor in their overall risk posture, particularly in sectors where HCL products are prevalent, such as manufacturing, supply chain management, and industrial services.

CWE-200Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #20OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Echo Request Ping (opens in a new tab)
TCP SYN Scan (opens in a new tab)
Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records (opens in a new tab)
DNS Zone Transfers (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=KB0129793 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Mar 2026, 13:32 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-200

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats