CVE-2025-67822VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jan 2026Updated 16 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-67822: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.4 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.4Critical

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% 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:L/I:H/A:H

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

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: 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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 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 2026-10-26.

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 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

1. Implement strict network segmentation to isolate the Mitel MiVoice MX-ONE Provisioning Manager interface from general network access, limiting exposure to trusted management networks only. 2. Apply access control lists (ACLs) and firewall rules to restrict inbound connections to the provisioning component, allowing only authorized IP addresses and management stations. 3. Monitor network traffic and system logs for unusual or unauthorized access attempts targeting the provisioning interface. 4. Engage with Mitel support to obtain and apply security patches or updates as soon as they become available to address this vulnerability. 5. Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) where possible on management interfaces to add an additional layer of security, even if the vulnerability bypasses authentication. 6. Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on telephony infrastructure to identify and remediate potential weaknesses. 7. Develop and test incident response plans specific to telephony system compromises to ensure rapid containment and recovery. 8. Educate IT and security teams about this vulnerability and the importance of securing telephony provisioning systems. 9. Consider temporary disabling or restricting provisioning services if feasible until patches are applied. 10. Collaborate with vendors and industry groups to stay informed about emerging threats and mitigation strategies related to Mitel products.

Description

A vulnerability in the Provisioning Manager component of Mitel MiVoice MX-ONE 7.3 (7.3.0.0.50) through 7.8 SP1 (7.8.1.0.14) could allow an unauthenticated attacker to conduct an authentication bypass attack due to improper authentication mechanisms. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to user or admin accounts in the system.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-67822 could be substantial, especially for those heavily dependent on Mitel MiVoice MX-ONE telephony systems for internal and external communications. Unauthorized access to provisioning functions can lead to interception or manipulation of calls, exposure of sensitive conversations, and disruption of communication services. This can affect business continuity, regulatory compliance (especially under GDPR regarding data confidentiality), and operational security. Critical sectors such as government, finance, healthcare, and telecommunications could face heightened risks due to the potential for espionage, fraud, or sabotage. The ability to bypass authentication without user interaction or credentials increases the likelihood of exploitation, potentially enabling attackers to move laterally within networks or establish persistent access. The lack of known exploits currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, as attackers may develop exploits rapidly following disclosure. The impact extends beyond confidentiality to integrity and availability, as attackers could alter provisioning settings or disrupt telephony services, causing operational outages or degraded service quality.

CWE-287Improper Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fake the Source of Data (opens in a new tab)
Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
Session Hijacking (opens in a new tab)
Token Impersonation (opens in a new tab)
Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server (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 15 Jan 2026, 21:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-287

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats