VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64753: gristlabs grist-core · Incorrect Authorization

Affects gristlabs grist-coreSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.7.7 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.7.7

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
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: 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: 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 13 Nov 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 gristlabs/grist-core to 1.7.7.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubgristlabs/grist-core`pkg:github/gristlabs/grist-core`Other threats	Affected <1.7.7	Fixed in 1.7.7

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 promptly upgrade grist-core to version 1.7.7 or later to ensure the authorization fix is applied. Until the upgrade can be performed, administrators should consider removing sensitive document history using the /states/remove endpoint to limit exposure of past changes. Additionally, blocking or restricting access to the /compare endpoint at the network or application level can prevent unauthorized queries. Access controls should be reviewed to minimize partial read permissions and ensure users only have the minimum necessary access. Monitoring and logging access to document comparison endpoints can help detect suspicious activity. Organizations should also audit their spreadsheets for sensitive data that might have been exposed historically and assess compliance with data protection regulations. Finally, educating users about the risks of sharing partial access to sensitive documents is advisable.

Description

grist-core is a spreadsheet hosting server. Prior to version 1.7.7, a user with only partial read access to a document could still access endpoints listing hashes for versions of that document and receive a full list of changes between versions, even if those changes contained cells, columns, or tables to which the user was not supposed to have read access. This was fixed in version 1.7.7 by restricting the `/compare` endpoint to users with full read access. As a workaround, remove sensitive document history using the `/states/remove` endpoint. Another possibility is to block the `/compare` endpoint.

Impact

For European organizations using grist-core for spreadsheet hosting and collaboration, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized data disclosure. Sensitive business information, financial data, or personal data stored in spreadsheets could be exposed to users with limited permissions, violating data protection regulations such as GDPR. The leak of historical changes could reveal confidential operational details or intellectual property. Although the vulnerability does not allow data modification or system disruption, the confidentiality breach alone can lead to reputational damage, regulatory penalties, and loss of competitive advantage. Organizations in sectors with strict data privacy requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and government, are particularly at risk. The medium severity score indicates a moderate but actionable threat, especially in environments where partial read access is granted to many users or external collaborators.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
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)
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 20 Nov 2025, 23:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats