VulnerabilityPublished 1 Jan 2026Updated 2 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-69203: signalk-server · Authentication Bypass by Spoofing

Affects signalk-serverSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.19.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.19.0

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

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

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: 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 on the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 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 signalk/signalk-server to 2.19.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubsignalk/signalk-server`pkg:github/signalk/signalk-server`Other threats	Affected <2.19.0	Fixed in 2.19.0

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading all instances of signalk-server to version 2.19.0 or later, which addresses the vulnerability by validating the X-Forwarded-For header and improving the admin UI to clearly display permission requests. Administrators should be trained to scrutinize access requests carefully, especially those requesting elevated permissions, and to verify the legitimacy of device identities through out-of-band methods. Network segmentation should be enforced to limit access to the signalk-server admin interface only to trusted internal networks and VPNs. Implementing strict logging and monitoring of access requests and approvals can help detect suspicious activity. Additionally, disabling or restricting the use of the X-Forwarded-For header where possible, or configuring reverse proxies to sanitize or overwrite this header, can reduce spoofing risks. Organizations should also review and patch any related information disclosure vulnerabilities to prevent device enumeration that aids attackers. Finally, instituting multi-factor authentication for administrative actions can add an extra layer of defense against social engineering attacks.

Description

Signal K Server is a server application that runs on a central hub in a boat. Versions prior to 2.19.0 of the access request system have two related features that when combined by themselves and with an information disclosure vulnerability enable convincing social engineering attacks against administrators. When a device creates an access request, it specifies three fields: `clientId`, `description`, and `permissions`. The SignalK admin UI displays the `description` field prominently to the administrator when showing pending requests, but the actual `permissions` field (which determines the access level granted) is less visible or displayed separately. This allows an attacker to request `admin` permissions while providing a description that suggests readonly access. The access request handler trusts the `X-Forwarded-For` HTTP header without validation to determine the client's IP address. This header is intended to preserve the original client IP when requests pass through reverse proxies, but when trusted unconditionally, it allows attackers to spoof their IP address. The spoofed IP is displayed to administrators in the access request approval interface, potentially making malicious requests appear to originate from trusted internal network addresses. Since device/source names can be enumerated via the information disclosure vulnerability, an attacker can impersonate a legitimate device or source, craft a convincing description, spoof a trusted internal IP address, and request elevated permissions, creating a highly convincing social engineering scenario that increases the likelihood of administrator approval. Users should upgrade to version 2.19.0 to fix this issue.

Impact

For European organizations operating maritime vessels or managing marine IoT infrastructure using SignalK signalk-server, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Unauthorized attackers can gain administrative access to central boat hubs, potentially allowing manipulation or disruption of navigation, communication, or sensor data. This could lead to compromised vessel safety, data integrity issues, and operational disruptions. The social engineering aspect increases the likelihood of successful exploitation, especially in environments where administrators may not be fully trained to detect spoofed requests. Confidentiality is impacted through device impersonation and information disclosure, integrity is threatened by unauthorized permission escalation, and availability could be affected if attackers disrupt server operations. Given the maritime industry's importance in Europe, including commercial shipping, fishing, and recreational boating, exploitation could have economic and safety consequences. However, the requirement for administrator interaction somewhat limits automated exploitation, making targeted attacks more probable than widespread automated compromise.

CWE-290Authentication Bypass by Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Misrepresentation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (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 8 Jan 2026, 22:11 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-290

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats