VulnerabilityPublished 2 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-58406: CGM CLININET · Protection Mechanism Failure

Affects CGM CLININETSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 2025.MS3 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 11% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2025.MS3

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 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 30 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

Upgrade CGM CLININET to 2025.MS3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
CGMCGM CLININET	Affected <2025.MS3	Fixed in 2025.MS3

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-58406, organizations should immediately implement and enforce essential HTTP security headers in CGM CLININET responses. Specifically, add X-Frame-Options or Content-Security-Policy headers to prevent clickjacking, X-Content-Type-Options to disable MIME sniffing, Cache-Control headers to control caching behavior securely, Cross-Origin-Opener-Policy and Cross-Origin-Embedder-Policy for robust cross-origin isolation, and Strict-Transport-Security to enforce HTTPS usage. Conduct thorough testing to ensure these headers are correctly applied across all application endpoints. Additionally, review and update web server and application configurations to support these headers consistently. Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) with strict directives to limit resource loading and script execution. Educate users about phishing and social engineering risks to reduce the likelihood of user interaction exploitation. Monitor web traffic for suspicious activities indicative of client-side attacks. Since no patches are currently available, these configuration changes are critical. Finally, maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans tailored to web application security incidents.

Description

The CGM CLININET application respond without essential security HTTP headers, exposing users to client‑side attacks such as clickjacking, MIME sniffing, unsafe caching, weak cross‑origin isolation, and missing transport security controls.

Impact

The vulnerability primarily impacts the confidentiality and integrity of users interacting with CGM CLININET by exposing them to client-side attacks. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized actions via clickjacking, execution of malicious scripts through MIME sniffing, exposure of sensitive cached data, and cross-origin attacks compromising user sessions or data. While availability is not directly affected, the trustworthiness and security posture of the application are undermined, potentially leading to reputational damage and regulatory compliance issues, especially given the healthcare context of CGM CLININET. Organizations may face increased risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to patient information. The lack of transport security headers also raises the risk of man-in-the-middle attacks, which could intercept or alter sensitive communications. Although exploitation requires user interaction, the widespread use of web browsers and social engineering techniques makes this a realistic threat vector. The medium CVSS score reflects these moderate but significant risks.

CWE-693Protection Mechanism Failure (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Tracing (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
Encryption Brute Forcing (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 2 Mar 2026, 11:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-693

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats