CVE-2025-62002VulnerabilityPublished 18 Dec 2025Updated 15 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-62002: BullWall Ransomware Containment · Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard

Affects BullWall Ransomware ContainmentSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 18 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
BullWall Ransomware Containment	Affected =4.6.0.0 =4.6.0.6 =4.6.0.7 =4.6.1.4	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations using affected BullWall versions should immediately review and adjust ransomware detection thresholds to lower values, ensuring that even single large file modifications can trigger alerts. Implement additional monitoring for unusual file size changes or encryption patterns beyond just file count metrics. Enforce strict access controls and multi-factor authentication to reduce the risk of credential compromise and insider threats. Conduct regular audits of user activity and file modification logs to detect suspicious behavior early. Stay informed about vendor updates and apply patches promptly once released. Consider deploying complementary ransomware detection technologies that analyze file content changes or behavior analytics to supplement BullWall’s detection. Train security teams to recognize signs of ransomware activity that may bypass file count thresholds. Finally, maintain robust offline backups to enable recovery in case of successful ransomware encryption.

Description

BullWall Ransomware Containment considers the number of files modified to trigger detection. An authenticated attacker could encrypt a single (possibly large) file without triggering detection if thresholds are configured to require multiple file changes. The number of files to trigger detection can be configured by the user. Versions 4.6.0.0, 4.6.0.6, 4.6.0.7, and 4.6.1.4 are affected. Other versions may also be affected.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to data integrity and operational continuity. If attackers exploit this flaw, they can encrypt critical files without triggering ransomware containment alerts, potentially leading to undetected ransomware activity and data loss. This can result in business disruption, financial losses, and reputational damage. Organizations relying on BullWall Ransomware Containment for ransomware defense may have a false sense of security if detection thresholds are set too high or if monitoring does not consider large single-file changes. Critical sectors such as finance, healthcare, energy, and government entities in Europe could be particularly impacted due to their reliance on robust ransomware defenses and the high value of their data. The requirement for attacker authentication reduces the risk from external threat actors but increases concern about insider threats or compromised credentials. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests limited immediate risk, but the vulnerability should be addressed proactively to prevent future exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 16 Jan 2026, 09:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-358

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats