VulnerabilityPublished 8 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-64650: IBM Storage Defender – Resiliency Service · Sensitive Data in Logs

Affects IBM Storage Defender – Resiliency ServiceSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 18% 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:H/I:N/A:N

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service	Affected =2.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Immediately restrict access to log files containing sensitive information by enforcing strict file permissions and access controls, limiting exposure to only trusted administrators.
Implement centralized and secure log management solutions that encrypt logs at rest and in transit to prevent unauthorized access.
Conduct thorough audits of existing logs to identify and purge any sensitive credentials that may have been recorded.
Monitor logs for unusual access patterns or attempts to retrieve log files, indicating potential reconnaissance or exploitation attempts.
Apply vendor patches or updates as soon as they become available to eliminate the root cause of sensitive data logging.
Configure IBM Storage Defender to minimize logging of sensitive information where possible, or enable redaction features if supported.
Educate system administrators and security teams about the risks of credential exposure in logs and enforce best practices for credential management and rotation.
Employ network segmentation and least privilege principles to reduce the impact of compromised credentials.
Integrate multi-factor authentication (MFA) for administrative access to storage systems to mitigate risks from credential disclosure.
Establish incident response procedures specifically addressing credential exposure incidents to enable rapid containment and remediation.

Description

IBM Storage Defender - Resiliency Service 2.0.0 through 2.0.18 could disclose sensitive user credentials in log files.

Impact

For European organizations, the exposure of sensitive credentials in log files can lead to unauthorized access to critical storage infrastructure, potentially enabling attackers to move laterally within networks or escalate privileges. This risk is particularly acute for sectors with stringent data protection requirements such as finance, healthcare, and government. The confidentiality breach could result in data exfiltration or disruption of storage resiliency services, indirectly affecting business continuity. Since IBM Storage Defender is used in enterprise storage environments, the impact extends to data integrity and availability if attackers leverage exposed credentials to manipulate storage configurations or disable resiliency features. The medium severity rating suggests that while the vulnerability is not immediately catastrophic, it poses a significant risk if combined with other attack vectors. European organizations must consider the regulatory implications under GDPR for any data breaches resulting from credential exposure. Additionally, the lack of known exploits does not preclude future attacks, making proactive mitigation critical.

CWE-532Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A09:2025: Security Logging & Alerting Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product writes sensitive information to a log file.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Consider seriously the sensitivity of the information written into log files. Do not write secrets into the log files.
Distribution
Remove debug log files before deploying the application into production.
Operation
Protect log files against unauthorized read/write.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Application Logging Vocabulary (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V7.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
V7.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fuzzing for application mapping (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ibm.com/support/pages/node/7253864 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 16 Dec 2025, 06:00 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-532

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats