CVE-2025-60454VulnerabilityPublished 3 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-60454: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 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 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/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 3 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 2026-10-26.

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

1. Immediate Restriction: Disable or restrict the image upload functionality in the MetInfo CMS image management module until a patch is available. 2. Input Validation and Sanitization: Implement strict server-side validation to reject SVG files containing script elements or other potentially malicious content. Use SVG sanitization libraries that remove JavaScript and other executable content from SVG files before allowing uploads. 3. Content Security Policy (CSP): Deploy a robust CSP on affected web applications to restrict the execution of inline scripts and limit the domains from which scripts can be loaded, mitigating the impact of XSS. 4. User Access Controls: Limit access to the image management module to only trusted administrators and monitor their activities closely. 5. Monitoring and Logging: Enable detailed logging of file uploads and access to uploaded images to detect suspicious activity. 6. Patch Management: Monitor MetInfo CMS vendor communications for official patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly. 7. Web Application Firewall (WAF): Use a WAF with rules designed to detect and block malicious SVG uploads or XSS payloads. 8. Educate Users: Train administrators and users to recognize suspicious behavior and report anomalies related to image uploads or website behavior. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on the specific attack vector (malicious SVG uploads) and the affected component (image management module).

Description

A stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been discovered in MetInfo CMS version 8.0. The vulnerability exists in the image management module, specifically in the app\system\img\admin\img_admin.class.php component. The vulnerability allows attackers to upload malicious SVG files containing JavaScript code that executes when the uploaded file is viewed or accessed by users.

Impact

For European organizations using MetInfo CMS 8.0, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of their web applications and user data. Exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the browsers of users, including administrators, potentially leading to session hijacking, theft of sensitive information, unauthorized administrative actions, or the spread of malware. This could result in data breaches, reputational damage, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR violations), and operational disruptions. Since the vulnerability resides in an administrative module, exploitation could facilitate deeper system compromise or lateral movement within the organization’s infrastructure. European organizations in sectors such as government, finance, healthcare, and e-commerce, which often rely on CMS platforms for public-facing websites or intranet portals, are particularly at risk. The absence of known exploits currently reduces immediate threat levels but does not eliminate the risk, as attackers may develop exploits rapidly once the vulnerability is public. The potential impact is amplified by the ability to target multiple users through stored XSS, increasing the attack surface and potential damage.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
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.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

snowhy77.github.io/2025/08/22/Stored-XSS-in-MetInfo-Image-Module/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Oct 2025, 13:42 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats