Skip to main content
CVE-2025-66390VulnerabilityPublished Updated

In Microsoft Azure API Management through 2025-10-17, when self-service signup (username/password Basic Authentication) is enabled in Tenant A, an attacker can reuse the registration flow by changing the hostname or tenant identifier to Tenant B, even when Tenant B has signup disabled at the UI level

Source GCVE Database

0
Authoritative record:CVE-2025-66390· Critical 9.8

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.8 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 16:39 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score
9.8Critical
How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.
EPSS
0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Exploitation evidence

  1. Disclosed: evidence found.

    CVE published 21 Jul 2026

  2. Detectable: no evidence on record.

    No public nuclei template indexed

  3. Weaponised: no evidence on record.

    No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB

  4. Exploited in the wild: no evidence on record.

    Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation

  5. Observed by OffSeq 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.

Description

In Microsoft Azure API Management through 2025-10-17, when self-service signup (username/password Basic Authentication) is enabled in Tenant A, an attacker can reuse the registration flow by changing the hostname or tenant identifier to Tenant B, even when Tenant B has signup disabled at the UI level. In other words, disabling signup in the UI does not disable the underlying API endpoint (which still accepts cross-tenant requests based on the Host header). NOTE: The supplier states that they evaluated the report and determined it did not cross a security boundary (i.e., the observed behavior was a configuration/state issue rather than an exploitable product vulnerability affecting tenant isolation). NOTE: The supplier evaluated this report and determined that it did not cross a security boundary (i.e., the observed behavior was a configuration/state issue rather than an exploitable product vulnerability affecting tenant isolation).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…