CVE-2025-61547VulnerabilityPublished 8 Jan 2026Updated 10 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-61547: vulnerability-disclosures · n/a

Affects vulnerability-disclosuresSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.8 Medium : upgrade to 19.76 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 19.76

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: 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 8 Jan 2026
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

Upgrade chndlrx/vulnerability-disclosures to 19.76.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubchndlrx/vulnerability-disclosures`pkg:github/chndlrx/vulnerability-disclosures`Other threats	Affected >=18.34 <19.76	Fixed in 19.76

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade edu Business Solutions Print Shop Pro WebDesk to version 19.76 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, organizations should implement compensating controls such as web application firewalls (WAFs) configured to detect and block CSRF attack patterns. Enforce strict Content Security Policies (CSP) to limit the execution of malicious scripts. Educate users about the risks of clicking on suspicious links or interacting with untrusted content to reduce the likelihood of successful social engineering. Additionally, implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the impact of credential compromise. Regularly audit and monitor logs for unusual activity indicative of CSRF exploitation attempts. Developers should review and enhance the application’s security by integrating anti-CSRF tokens or same-site cookie attributes to prevent unauthorized requests. Conduct penetration testing focused on CSRF to validate the effectiveness of mitigations.

Description

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) is present on all functions in edu Business Solutions Print Shop Pro WebDesk version 18.34 (fixed in 19.76). The application does not implement proper CSRF tokens or other other protective measures, allowing a remote attacker to trick authenticated users into unknowingly executing unintended actions within their session. This can lead to unauthorized data modification such as credential updates.

Impact

For European organizations using edu Business Solutions Print Shop Pro WebDesk version 18.34, this vulnerability can lead to unauthorized modification of sensitive data, including credential updates. Such unauthorized changes can result in account compromise, unauthorized access escalation, and potential data breaches. The integrity and confidentiality of organizational data are at risk, potentially affecting business operations and trust. Since the vulnerability requires user interaction, phishing or social engineering campaigns could be used to exploit it, increasing the risk in environments with less user security awareness. The absence of availability impact means systems remain operational, but the integrity and confidentiality risks are significant. Organizations in sectors relying heavily on print shop management and document workflows may face operational disruptions or reputational damage if exploited. The medium severity score indicates a moderate but actionable threat that should be addressed promptly to avoid exploitation.

CWE-352Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Compound weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #3OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
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
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
Architecture and Design
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Domain Search Timing (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Identification (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/chndlrx/vulnerability-disclosures/tree/main/CVE-2025-61547 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Feb 2026, 11:06 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-352

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats