CVE-2025-64729VulnerabilityPublished 16 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-64729: AVEVA Process Optimization · Missing Authorization

Affects AVEVA Process OptimizationSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 8% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: 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: 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 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 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 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
AVEVAProcess Optimization	Affected <=2024.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict access controls to limit the number of users with write permissions to Process Optimization project files. 2. Enforce the principle of least privilege at both OS and application levels to restrict standard users from modifying critical files. 3. Monitor and audit project file integrity regularly using file integrity monitoring tools to detect unauthorized changes promptly. 4. Educate users about the risks of interacting with potentially tampered project files and encourage verification of file sources. 5. Isolate the AVEVA Process Optimization environment from general user workstations to reduce exposure. 6. Apply vendor patches immediately once available; engage with AVEVA support to obtain updates or workarounds. 7. Use application whitelisting and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect suspicious code execution within the application context. 8. Implement multi-factor authentication and session monitoring to detect anomalous user behavior that could indicate privilege escalation. 9. Establish incident response procedures specific to industrial control system environments to quickly respond to potential exploitation attempts.

Description

The vulnerability, if exploited, could allow an authenticated miscreant (OS Standard User) to tamper with Process Optimization project files, embed code, and escalate their privileges to the identity of a victim user who subsequently interacts with the project files.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in industrial sectors such as manufacturing, energy, and utilities that rely on AVEVA Process Optimization, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Successful exploitation can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive process data, manipulation of optimization parameters, and potential sabotage of industrial processes. The ability to escalate privileges and impersonate other users undermines trust in user accountability and can facilitate further lateral movement within the network. Confidentiality breaches could expose proprietary process information or intellectual property, while integrity violations could cause incorrect process optimizations, potentially leading to operational disruptions or safety hazards. Although availability impact is low, the indirect consequences of corrupted process data can be severe. European critical infrastructure operators using this software are particularly vulnerable, as attackers could leverage this flaw to disrupt essential services or cause physical damage. The lack of known exploits suggests a window of opportunity for defenders to implement mitigations before active exploitation occurs.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (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 16 Jan 2026, 00:58 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats