VulnerabilityPublished 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-62371: opensearch-project data-prepper · Improper Certificate Validation

Affects opensearch-project data-prepperSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High : upgrade to 2.12.2 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.4High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.12.2

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 15 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 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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 opensearch-project/data-prepper to 2.12.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubopensearch-project/data-prepper`pkg:github/opensearch-project/data-prepper`Other threats	Affected <2.12.2	Fixed in 2.12.2

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade OpenSearch Data Prepper to version 2.12.2 or later to apply the official patch that enforces proper SSL certificate validation. Until upgrade is possible, a critical mitigation is to explicitly configure the cert parameter in the OpenSearch sink and source plugin settings with the path to the trusted CA certificate of the OpenSearch cluster. This ensures SSL certificate validation is performed and prevents the default 'trust all' behavior. Network segmentation should be enforced to limit access to OpenSearch clusters and Data Prepper instances, reducing the risk of MITM attacks. Organizations should also audit existing Data Prepper configurations to detect any instances where the cert parameter is missing or SSL validation is disabled. Monitoring network traffic for suspicious MITM activity and validating the integrity of observability data can help detect exploitation attempts. Additionally, implementing mutual TLS authentication between Data Prepper and OpenSearch clusters can further strengthen security. Security teams should review and update incident response plans to consider potential data manipulation scenarios arising from this vulnerability. Finally, educating DevOps and security teams about secure configuration practices for observability tools is essential to prevent similar issues.

Description

OpenSearch Data Prepper as an open source data collector for observability data. In versions prior to 2.12.2, the OpenSearch sink and source plugins in Data Prepper trust all SSL certificates by default when no certificate path is provided. Prior to this fix, the OpenSearch sink and source plugins would automatically use a trust all SSL strategy when connecting to OpenSearch clusters if no certificate path was explicitly configured. This behavior bypasses SSL certificate validation, potentially allowing attackers to intercept and modify data in transit through man-in-the-middle attacks. The vulnerability affects connections to OpenSearch when the cert parameter is not explicitly provided. This issue has been patched in version 2.12.2. As a workaround, users can add the cert parameter to their OpenSearch sink or source configuration with the path to the cluster's CA certificate.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the confidentiality and integrity of observability data collected and transmitted to OpenSearch clusters. Observability data often includes logs, metrics, and traces critical for monitoring, troubleshooting, and security analytics. An attacker exploiting this vulnerability could intercept sensitive operational data, manipulate logs to hide malicious activity, or inject false data to mislead monitoring systems. This could impair incident detection and response capabilities, potentially leading to prolonged undetected breaches or operational disruptions. Organizations in sectors such as finance, energy, telecommunications, and government, which rely heavily on observability platforms for security and compliance, are particularly vulnerable. The vulnerability does not directly affect availability, but the indirect effects on security monitoring could have severe operational consequences. Given the network-based attack vector, organizations with exposed or poorly segmented network environments are at higher risk. The lack of required authentication lowers the barrier for exploitation if network access is gained. The vulnerability’s impact is amplified in environments where Data Prepper is deployed without explicit SSL certificate configuration, a common misconfiguration in complex observability setups.

CWE-295Improper Certificate Validation (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
Implementation
If certificate pinning is being used, ensure that all relevant properties of the certificate are fully validated before the certificate is pinned, including the hostname.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V9.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.9.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 17:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-295

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats