VulnerabilityPublished 25 Dec 2025Updated 26 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-59683: Pexip Infinity · Incorrect Authorization

Affects Pexip InfinitySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.2 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.2High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 26% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: 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: 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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Dec 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 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
Pexip Infinity	Affected =15.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-59683, European organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Immediately upgrade Pexip Infinity to version 38.1 or later, where the vulnerability is addressed. 2) Review and disable the use of Office 365 Legacy Exchange Tokens in favor of modern, more secure authentication methods such as OAuth 2.0 where possible. 3) Implement strict access controls and network segmentation to limit exposure of the Secure Scheduler for Exchange service to trusted internal networks only. 4) Monitor system logs and resource usage metrics for unusual spikes indicative of exploitation attempts or denial of service conditions. 5) Conduct vulnerability scanning and penetration testing focused on Pexip Infinity deployments to identify potential exploitation vectors. 6) Educate IT and security teams about the risks associated with legacy token usage and improper authorization vulnerabilities. 7) Coordinate with Microsoft 365 administrators to ensure secure token management and minimize legacy token dependencies. 8) Apply network-level protections such as Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious requests targeting the scheduler service. These targeted measures go beyond generic patching and help reduce the attack surface and detect potential exploitation early.

Description

CVE-2025-59683 is a high-severity vulnerability in Pexip Infinity versions 15.0 through 38.0 before 38.1, involving improper access control in the Secure Scheduler for Exchange service when integrated with Office 365 Legacy Exchange Tokens. This flaw allows remote attackers to read sensitive data and cause resource exhaustion, potentially leading to denial of service without requiring authentication or user interaction. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 8.2, indicating significant risk. Although no known exploits are currently reported in the wild, the ease of remote exploitation and the critical nature of affected systems make this a serious concern. European organizations using Pexip Infinity for video conferencing and scheduling, especially those integrated with Office 365, are at risk. Mitigation requires timely patching to version 38.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-59683 can be significant. Pexip Infinity is widely used for enterprise video conferencing and collaboration, often integrated with Microsoft Office 365 environments common across Europe. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive meeting and scheduling information, potentially exposing confidential business discussions or personal data protected under GDPR. The denial of service aspect could disrupt critical communication infrastructure, affecting business continuity and operational efficiency. This is particularly impactful for sectors reliant on secure and reliable video conferencing, such as finance, healthcare, government, and education. The remote, unauthenticated nature of the vulnerability increases the risk of widespread exploitation, including by cybercriminals or state-sponsored actors targeting European enterprises. Resource exhaustion attacks could also degrade service availability, impacting remote work capabilities and collaboration. The combination of confidentiality loss and availability disruption elevates the threat to a high level, necessitating urgent remediation to protect sensitive data and maintain service reliability.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

docs.pexip.com/admin/security_bulletins.htm (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 1 Jan 2026, 22:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats