CVE-2025-6839VulnerabilityPublished 29 Jun 2025Updated 30 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6839: Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation System · Backdoor

Affects Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation SystemSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 29 Jun 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation System	Affected =1.0.0 =1.0.1 =1.0.2 =1.0.3 =1.0.4 =1.0.5 =1.0.6 =1.0.7 =1.0.8 =1.0.9 =1.0.10 =1.0.11	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations using the affected versions of the Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation System should take immediate action to mitigate this vulnerability. Since no official patches are currently linked, the following specific measures are recommended: 1) Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the 'payload' parameter within the eval function to prevent code injection. 2) Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious payloads targeting the vulnerable endpoint. 3) Conduct thorough code audits focusing on the use of 'eval' functions and replace them with safer alternatives where possible. 4) Restrict network access to the affected service, limiting exposure to trusted internal networks only. 5) Monitor logs for unusual activity or signs of exploitation attempts, including unexpected code execution or backdoor indicators. 6) Prepare for incident response by backing up critical data and establishing containment procedures. 7) Engage with the vendor for updates or patches and apply them promptly once available. 8) Consider deploying application-layer intrusion detection systems to identify exploitation patterns.

Description

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation System up to 1.0.11. Affected by this issue is the function eval of the file public/assets/less/bootstrap-less/mixins/head.php. The manipulation of the argument payload leads to backdoor. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability could be significant, especially for public sector entities, governmental departments, or private organizations that rely on the Conjure Position Department Service Quality Evaluation System for operational assessments and service quality monitoring. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive evaluation data, manipulation of performance metrics, and disruption of departmental services, undermining trust and operational integrity. Additionally, the presence of a backdoor could serve as a foothold for attackers to escalate privileges, move laterally within networks, and potentially exfiltrate confidential information. This could have regulatory implications under GDPR if personal or sensitive data is compromised, leading to legal and financial repercussions. The remote exploitability without authentication increases the risk profile, making it a priority for organizations to address promptly to prevent potential breaches and service interruptions.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…