VulnerabilityPublished 13 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-68703: samrocketman jervis · Inadequate Encryption Strength

Affects samrocketman jervisSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High : upgrade to 2.2 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 2% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.2

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 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

Upgrade jervis and samrocketman/jervis to 2.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
samrocketmanjervis	Affected <2.2	Fixed in 2.2
GitHubsamrocketman/jervis`pkg:github/samrocketman/jervis`Other threats	Affected <2.2	Fixed in 2.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade the jervis library to version 2.2 or later, where the salt derivation method has been corrected to ensure unique and unpredictable salts for each encryption operation. Organizations should audit their Jenkins environments to identify any usage of jervis versions below 2.2 and prioritize patching. Additionally, review and enhance encryption key management practices to avoid deterministic key derivation. Implement monitoring and alerting on Jenkins pipeline activities to detect unusual access or encryption-related anomalies. Restrict network access to Jenkins servers to trusted IPs and enforce strong authentication and authorization controls to limit potential exploitation vectors. Consider rotating any secrets or credentials that may have been encrypted with vulnerable keys. Finally, incorporate cryptographic best practices in pipeline scripts and shared libraries to prevent similar weaknesses.

Description

CVE-2025-68703 is a high-severity vulnerability in the samrocketman jervis library used for Job DSL plugin scripts and Jenkins pipeline libraries. Versions prior to 2.2 derive the encryption salt from a sha256 hash of the passphrase, causing identical keys to be generated for the same password across encryption operations. This inadequate encryption strength (CWE-326) can lead to predictable encryption keys, weakening confidentiality protections. The vulnerability requires no authentication or user interaction and can be exploited remotely. It has a CVSS 4.0 score of 8.7, indicating high severity. The issue is fixed in version 2.2 of jervis.

Impact

European organizations using Jenkins with the jervis library versions prior to 2.2 face significant risks. The reuse of encryption keys can lead to exposure of sensitive pipeline secrets, credentials, or configuration data, potentially allowing attackers to compromise build environments or inject malicious code into automated workflows. This can result in data breaches, supply chain attacks, or disruption of software delivery processes. Industries with stringent compliance requirements such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure are especially vulnerable to confidentiality breaches. The lack of authentication or user interaction requirements means attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely, increasing the attack surface. The impact extends to any organization leveraging Jenkins pipelines for automation, which is widespread across European enterprises. The potential for lateral movement within networks after initial compromise also raises concerns about broader organizational security.

CWE-326Inadequate Encryption Strength (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product stores or transmits sensitive data using an encryption scheme that is theoretically sound, but is not strong enough for the level of protection required.
Architecture and Design
Use an encryption scheme that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.7 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Brute Force (opens in a new tab)
Protocol Analysis (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Jan 2026, 02:59 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-326

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats