CVE-2025-59945VulnerabilityPublished 27 Sep 2025Updated 29 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-59945: Syslifters sysreptor · Incorrect Privilege Assignment

Affects Syslifters sysreptorSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High · fixed in 2025.83 : patch Syslifters sysreptor soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2025.83

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 27 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 2026-10-26.

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

Organizations should immediately upgrade sysreptor installations to version 2025.83 or later, where the privilege assignment flaw is fixed. Until patching is possible, restrict sysreptor access to trusted users only and monitor user activities for unusual privilege escalations or project access patterns. Implement strict authentication and authorization policies, including multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all users to reduce risk of compromised credentials. Conduct audits of user permissions regularly to detect and revoke unauthorized privilege assignments. Additionally, consider network segmentation to limit sysreptor access to internal networks and use logging and alerting mechanisms to detect suspicious modifications to pentest projects. Educate pentest teams and administrators about the vulnerability and the importance of timely patching and monitoring. Finally, review and update incident response plans to address potential data integrity breaches related to pentest reporting platforms.

Description

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. In versions from 2024.74 to before 2025.83, authenticated and unprivileged (non-admin) users can assign the is_project_admin permission to their own user. This allows users to read, modify and delete pentesting projects they are not members of and are therefore not supposed to access. This issue has been patched in version 2025.83.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability is substantial, especially for those in sectors with strict data protection regulations such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure. Pentesting reports often contain detailed information about security weaknesses and remediation strategies; unauthorized access or modification could lead to data breaches or sabotage of security efforts. This could result in regulatory penalties under GDPR, reputational damage, and increased risk of follow-on attacks. Additionally, organizations using sysreptor for internal or client-facing pentest reporting may face contractual and compliance issues if sensitive data is compromised. The ability for non-admin users to escalate privileges undermines internal access controls, increasing insider threat risks. The lack of known exploits in the wild suggests limited immediate threat, but the ease of exploitation and high impact warrant urgent patching and review of access controls.

CWE-266Incorrect Privilege Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
A product incorrectly assigns a privilege to a particular actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 5 Oct 2025, 00:58 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-266

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats