VulnerabilityPublished 15 Dec 2025Updated 16 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-65176: Dynatrace OneAgent · Improper Access Control

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High · fixed in 1.325.47 : patch Dynatrace OneAgent soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Dynatrace OneAgent before 1.325.47
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.325.47

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 15 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

AI-suggested

Immediately upgrade Dynatrace OneAgent to version 1.325.47 or later once available to address the vulnerability.
Until patches are deployed, restrict local access to systems running OneAgent to trusted personnel only and enforce strict endpoint security controls.
Monitor network share access logs and authentication attempts for unusual patterns, such as repeated failed logons or multiple user token impersonations.
Implement network-level protections against NTLM relay attacks, including disabling NTLM where feasible, enforcing SMB signing, and deploying SMB relay protections on network devices.
Use endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools to detect anomalous impersonation or token usage behaviors.
Educate IT and security teams about the vulnerability and signs of exploitation to enable rapid incident response.
Review and tighten permissions on network shares to minimize the impact of any successful relay attack.
Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) for network resource access where possible to reduce reliance on NTLM authentication.

Description

An issue was discovered in Dynatrace OneAgent before 1.325.47. When attempting to access a remote network share from a machine where OneAgent is installed and receiving a "STATUS_LOGON_FAILURE" error, the agent will retrieve every user token on the machine and repeatedly attempt to access the network share while impersonating them. The exploitation of this vulnerability can allow an unprivileged attacker with access to the affected system to perform NTLM relay attacks.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability presents a significant risk, especially in environments where Dynatrace OneAgent is deployed on endpoints or servers with access to network shares. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to impersonate legitimate users and relay NTLM authentication requests, potentially leading to unauthorized access to sensitive network resources, lateral movement, and data exfiltration. Confidentiality is primarily impacted, as attackers can gain access to resources without valid credentials. The vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability directly but can facilitate further attacks that compromise these aspects. Organizations in sectors with high regulatory requirements for data protection, such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, could face severe compliance and reputational consequences if exploited. The ease of exploitation (no privileges or user interaction required) increases the threat level, particularly in environments with weak local access controls or where endpoint security is insufficient.

CWE-284Improper Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #19OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Embedding Scripts within Scripts (opens in a new tab)
Modification of Windows Service Configuration (opens in a new tab)
Malicious Root Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Intent Spoof (opens in a new tab)
WebView Exposure (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 22 Dec 2025, 19:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-284

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats