CVE-2025-58070VulnerabilityPublished 24 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-58070: Implem Pleasanter · Cross-site scripting (XSS)

Affects Implem PleasanterSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

6.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 10% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
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: 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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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 24 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 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

AI-suggested

1. Immediately restrict or disable the Preview for Attachments feature in Pleasanter until a patch is available. 2. Implement strict input validation and output encoding on all attachment previews to sanitize any embedded scripts. 3. Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to limit the execution of unauthorized scripts within the application context. 4. Educate users to avoid opening suspicious attachments or previews from untrusted sources. 5. Monitor application logs and user activity for unusual behavior indicative of XSS exploitation attempts. 6. Isolate the Pleasanter environment within segmented network zones to reduce lateral movement risk. 7. Regularly update Pleasanter to the latest version once patches addressing this vulnerability are released. 8. Conduct security testing focused on XSS vectors in the application to identify any additional injection points. 9. Use web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules tailored to detect and block XSS payloads targeting the attachment preview feature. 10. Coordinate with Implem Inc. for timely patch deployment and vulnerability disclosure updates.

Description

Pleasanter contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in Preview for Attachments, which allows an attacker to execute an arbitrary script in a logged-in user's web browser.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality and integrity of user data within Pleasanter environments. Attackers exploiting this XSS flaw could hijack user sessions, steal sensitive information, or perform unauthorized actions under the victim's identity. This could lead to data breaches, unauthorized data modification, or lateral movement within the affected organization's network. Since Pleasanter is a collaborative platform, the compromise of one user could impact multiple users and business processes. The absence of availability impact reduces the risk of service disruption but does not diminish the potential damage from data exposure or manipulation. Organizations relying on Pleasanter for critical workflows or sensitive data management are particularly at risk. The lack of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive mitigation. However, the ease of exploitation (no authentication needed, low complexity) means attackers could quickly develop exploits once the vulnerability becomes widely known. European entities with regulatory requirements around data protection (e.g., GDPR) must consider the compliance implications of potential data leakage or unauthorized access resulting from this vulnerability.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Oct 2025, 07:37 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats