VulnerabilityPublished 3 Dec 2025Updated 5 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-65842: Incorrect Privilege Assignment

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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: 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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 3 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

European organizations should first identify macOS systems running the Aquarius HelperTool version 1.0.003 or similar vulnerable versions. Since no official patches are currently available, organizations should apply the following mitigations: (1) Restrict local access to macOS systems by enforcing strict physical and logical access controls, including limiting administrative privileges and using endpoint protection solutions. (2) Monitor and audit local IPC connections and system logs for unusual activity related to the Aquarius HelperTool or NSTask executions. (3) Employ application whitelisting and runtime protection to detect and block unauthorized command executions at the root level. (4) Use macOS security features such as System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Endpoint Security Framework to limit the impact of privilege escalation attempts. (5) Educate users about the risks of running untrusted local software and enforce least privilege principles. (6) Stay updated with vendor advisories for patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. (7) Consider isolating critical macOS systems or using virtualization to reduce exposure. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling local access, monitoring IPC usage, and leveraging macOS-specific security controls.

Description

The Aquarius HelperTool (1.0.003) privileged XPC service on macOS contains multiple flaws that allow local privilege escalation. The service accepts XPC connections from any local process without validating the client's identity, and its authorization logic incorrectly calls AuthorizationCopyRights with a NULL reference, causing all authorization checks to succeed. The executeCommand:authorization:withReply: method then interpolates attacker-controlled input into NSTask and executes it with root privileges. A local attacker can exploit these weaknesses to run arbitrary commands as root, create persistent backdoors, or obtain a fully interactive root shell.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to macOS endpoints that have the Aquarius HelperTool installed. Successful exploitation allows attackers with local access—such as employees, contractors, or malware that has gained initial foothold—to escalate privileges to root, bypassing standard security controls. This can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification or deletion of critical files, installation of persistent malware, and full system compromise. The confidentiality and integrity of organizational data on affected macOS devices are at risk. Although the attack requires local access, it could be leveraged in targeted attacks or combined with other exploits to gain initial access. Organizations with macOS-based infrastructure, especially those in sectors with high-value intellectual property or sensitive personal data (e.g., finance, healthcare, government), face elevated risks. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate threat but does not eliminate the risk of future exploitation. The vulnerability does not affect availability directly but could be used to disrupt operations through malicious root-level actions.

CWE-266Incorrect Privilege Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
A product incorrectly assigns a privilege to a particular actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
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)
Secure Design Principles (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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

almightysec.com/helpertool-xpc-service-local-privilege-escalation/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Dec 2025, 18:27 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-266

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats