CVE-2025-7080VulnerabilityPublished 6 Jul 2025Updated 7 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-7080: Done-0 Jank · Use of Hard-coded Password

Affects Done-0 JankSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 35% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
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: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
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: 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: 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.
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 6 Jul 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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit their use of the Done-0 Jank product to determine exposure to this vulnerability. Specific mitigation steps include: 1) Replace hard-coded secrets with securely generated, environment-specific secrets managed via secure vaults or environment variables rather than embedded in source code. 2) Implement secret rotation policies to periodically update JWT secrets and invalidate existing tokens. 3) Monitor application logs and authentication events for anomalies indicative of token forgery or unauthorized access attempts. 4) Engage with the Done-0 vendor or community to obtain patched versions or updates addressing this issue, given the continuous delivery model. 5) Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or Web Application Firewalls (WAF) to detect and block suspicious JWT token usage patterns. 6) Conduct penetration testing focusing on JWT authentication flows to validate the effectiveness of mitigations. 7) Educate developers on secure secret management best practices to prevent recurrence. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice by focusing on secret management, monitoring, and vendor engagement specific to this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in Done-0 Jank up to 322caebbad10568460364b9667aa62c3080bfc17. Affected is an unknown function of the file internal/utils/jwt_utils.go of the component JWT Token Handler. The manipulation of the argument accessSecret/refreshSecret with the input jank-blog-secret/jank-blog-refresh-secret leads to use of hard-coded password. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitability is told to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Continious delivery with rolling releases is used by this product. Therefore, no version details of affected nor updated releases are available.

Impact

For European organizations using the Done-0 Jank product, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to confidentiality and authentication integrity. If exploited, attackers could generate valid JWT tokens, impersonate legitimate users, or gain unauthorized access to protected resources. This could lead to data breaches, unauthorized transactions, or lateral movement within corporate networks. The medium CVSS score and high attack complexity suggest that only skilled attackers with sufficient resources would likely succeed, limiting widespread impact. However, organizations in sectors with stringent data protection requirements (e.g., finance, healthcare, government) could face regulatory and reputational damage if compromised. Since JWT tokens are commonly used for session management and API authentication, the vulnerability could affect web applications, microservices, and cloud-based services relying on Jank. The continuous delivery model may complicate patch management, requiring organizations to monitor updates closely. Overall, the threat is significant but not critical, demanding timely remediation to prevent potential exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…