CVE-2025-58065VulnerabilityPublished 11 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-58065: dpgaspar Flask-AppBuilder · Improper Authentication

Affects dpgaspar Flask-AppBuilderSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 4.8.1 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.8.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
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: 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: 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 11 Sep 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 2026-10-25.

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

Upgrade dpgaspar Flask-AppBuilder to 4.8.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
dpgaspar Flask-AppBuilder	Affected <4.8.1	Fixed in 4.8.1

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade to Flask-AppBuilder version 4.8.1 or later as soon as possible to apply the official fix that disables the password reset endpoint when using non-database authentication methods. 2. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, manually disable the password reset routes in the Flask-AppBuilder application configuration to prevent access to the vulnerable endpoint. 3. Implement strict access control rules at the web server or reverse proxy level (e.g., using Nginx or Apache) to block or restrict access to the password reset URL, limiting it to trusted administrators or internal networks only. 4. Enhance monitoring and alerting for password reset attempts, especially from accounts that have been disabled on the authentication provider, to detect suspicious activity early. 5. Review and audit user account management processes to ensure that disabling users on the authentication provider is complemented by application-level controls and that no residual access paths remain. 6. Conduct penetration testing or vulnerability scanning focused on authentication flows to verify that the password reset endpoint is properly disabled or protected. 7. Educate development and operations teams about the risks of exposing password reset functionality when using external authentication providers.

Description

Flask-AppBuilder is an application development framework. Prior to version 4.8.1, when Flask-AppBuilder is configured to use OAuth, LDAP, or other non-database authentication methods, the password reset endpoint remains registered and accessible, despite not being displayed in the user interface. This allows an enabled user to reset their password and be able to create JWT tokens even after the user is disabled on the authentication provider. Users should upgrade to Flask-AppBuilder version 4.8.1 or later to receive a fix. If immediate upgrade is not possible, manually disable password reset routes in the application configuration; implement additional access controls at the web server or proxy level to block access to the reset my password URL; and/or monitor for suspicious password reset attempts from disabled accounts.

Impact

For European organizations using Flask-AppBuilder versions prior to 4.8.1 with OAuth, LDAP, or other non-database authentication methods, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the integrity of user authentication. Attackers or malicious insiders with enabled user accounts could reset their passwords and generate JWT tokens even after their accounts are disabled on the authentication provider, allowing persistent unauthorized access. This could lead to unauthorized actions within applications built on Flask-AppBuilder, potentially compromising sensitive business processes or data integrity. Given the widespread adoption of OAuth and LDAP in enterprise environments across Europe, especially in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government, the vulnerability could be exploited to bypass access controls and maintain persistence within critical systems. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact confidentiality or availability, the ability to maintain unauthorized access undermines trust in authentication mechanisms and could facilitate further attacks or data manipulation. Organizations relying on centralized authentication providers must be aware that disabling users at the provider level may not be sufficient to revoke access in vulnerable Flask-AppBuilder deployments.

CWE-287Improper Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fake the Source of Data (opens in a new tab)
Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
Session Hijacking (opens in a new tab)
Token Impersonation (opens in a new tab)
Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Sep 2025, 18:03 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-287

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats