VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-65922: Planka · CVE-2025-65922 is a medium-severity

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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 5 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 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 implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Configure Planka or its hosting environment to include X-Frame-Options (e.g., DENY or SAMEORIGIN) and/or Content Security Policy frame-ancestors directives to explicitly prevent unauthorized framing. 2) Educate users about the risks of phishing and UI redressing attacks, emphasizing caution when interacting with Planka interfaces embedded in unknown or suspicious websites. 3) Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) for Planka access to reduce the impact of credential theft. 4) Monitor network traffic and logs for unusual access patterns or repeated failed login attempts that may indicate phishing or credential stuffing. 5) Use browser security features and extensions that warn users about framing or suspicious sites. 6) Regularly update Planka and related infrastructure to incorporate any future security patches addressing this or related vulnerabilities. 7) Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAF) with rules to detect and block framing attempts from unauthorized domains. 8) Conduct phishing simulation exercises to improve user resilience against social engineering attacks leveraging this vulnerability.

Description

CVE-2025-65922 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Planka 2.0.0 where the application lacks X-Frame-Options and Content Security Policy (CSP) frame-ancestors headers. This omission allows attackers to embed the Planka interface within malicious iframes, potentially facilitating phishing attacks through UI redressing. Although the vulnerability does not permit unauthorized modification of projects or tasks, users may be tricked into entering sensitive information into fake overlays. The vendor disputes the severity, citing SameSite=Strict cookies and browser same-origin policies that prevent session establishment and credential interception in cross-origin iframe contexts. Exploitation requires user interaction and trust in the malicious parent page, similar to traditional phishing. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild. The CVSS score is 4.3, reflecting limited confidentiality impact and no integrity or availability impact.

Impact

For European organizations using Planka 2.0.0, this vulnerability primarily increases the risk of phishing attacks that leverage UI redressing techniques. While the application itself is not directly compromised, users may be deceived into submitting sensitive credentials or information to attacker-controlled interfaces masquerading as the legitimate Planka application. This can lead to credential theft, unauthorized access to organizational resources, and potential lateral movement if attackers leverage stolen credentials. The impact on confidentiality is limited to user credentials or data voluntarily provided under deception, with no direct integrity or availability compromise of the Planka system. Given the reliance on user trust and interaction, the threat is more social-engineering oriented but can still result in significant security incidents, especially in environments where Planka is used for project management and collaboration involving sensitive data. Organizations with high user awareness and strong phishing defenses may mitigate risk, but those with less mature security cultures or remote workforces could be more vulnerable. The absence of technical exploitation avenues reduces the likelihood of automated attacks, but targeted phishing campaigns remain a concern.

CWE-1021Improper Restriction of Rendered UI Layers or Frames (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The web application does not restrict or incorrectly restricts frame objects or UI layers that belong to another application or domain.
Implementation
The use of X-Frame-Options allows developers of web content to restrict the usage of their application within the form of overlays, frames, or iFrames. The developer can indicate from which domains can frame the content.
Implementation
A developer can use a "frame-breaker" script in each page that should not be framed. This is very helpful for legacy browsers that do not support X-Frame-Options security feature previously mentioned.
Implementation
This defense-in-depth technique can be used to prevent the improper usage of frames in web applications. It prioritizes the valid sources of data to be loaded into the application through the usage of declarative policies.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Content Security Policy (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V14.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V14.4.7 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Clickjacking (opens in a new tab)
Flash File Overlay (opens in a new tab)
iFrame Overlay (opens in a new tab)
Task Impersonation (opens in a new tab)
Tapjacking (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 12 Jan 2026, 21:39 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1021

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats