VulnerabilityPublished 31 Jul 2025Updated 23 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-7738: django-ansible-base · Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information

Affects django-ansible-baseSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 31 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Ansible django-ansible-base	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-7738, organizations should first restrict access to the Ansible Automation Platform's Gateway API and authenticator configuration interfaces strictly to trusted, minimal-privilege administrators. Implement strong role-based access controls (RBAC) and audit logging to monitor access to sensitive configurations. Until a patch is available, consider encrypting or obfuscating stored client secrets externally or using vault solutions to manage secrets outside of the platform. Regularly rotate client secrets and GitHub Enterprise credentials to limit the window of exposure. Review and harden internal policies around credential handling and sharing among privileged users. Monitor for unusual access patterns or data exfiltration attempts involving the Ansible platform. Once the vendor releases a patch or update addressing this vulnerability, apply it promptly. Additionally, educate privileged users about the risks of handling cleartext secrets and enforce secure operational procedures. Consider network segmentation to isolate management interfaces from broader network access.

Description

A flaw was found in Ansible Automation Platform (AAP) where the Gateway API returns the client secret for certain GitHub Enterprise authenticators in clear text. This vulnerability affects administrators or auditors accessing authenticator configurations. While access is limited to privileged users, the clear text exposure of sensitive credentials increases the risk of accidental leaks or misuse.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-7738 is the potential compromise of confidentiality due to the exposure of client secrets in clear text. If an attacker or unauthorized insider gains access to these secrets, they could impersonate the Ansible Automation Platform to GitHub Enterprise, potentially leading to unauthorized access to source code repositories or other sensitive resources. Although exploitation requires privileged access, the risk of accidental leaks increases, especially in environments with multiple administrators or auditors. This could lead to insider threats or lateral movement if credentials are exfiltrated. The vulnerability does not affect system integrity or availability, so direct disruption of services is unlikely. However, the compromise of authentication credentials can have downstream effects on organizational security posture and trust in automation workflows. Organizations relying heavily on Ansible Automation Platform integrated with GitHub Enterprise are at risk, particularly those with large teams managing infrastructure as code or CI/CD pipelines. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the need for remediation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…