CVE-2025-8415VulnerabilityPublished 20 Aug 2025Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-8415: Red Hat Cryostat 4 on RHEL 9 · Authentication Bypass by Alternate Name

Affects Red Hat Cryostat 4 on RHEL 9Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% 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:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 20 Aug 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

1. Immediately verify and enforce network policies to restrict access to the Cryostat HTTP API port, ensuring it is not exposed to untrusted networks. 2. Configure Cryostat to bind only to localhost or trusted network interfaces if possible, reducing external exposure. 3. Apply any available patches or updates from Red Hat addressing CVE-2025-8415 as soon as they are released. 4. Implement strict firewall rules or Kubernetes Network Policies to limit API access to authorized administrators or monitoring systems only. 5. Regularly audit network configurations and API access logs to detect unauthorized access attempts. 6. Use network segmentation to isolate monitoring and profiling tools from general user or internet-facing networks. 7. Educate system administrators about the risks of default API bindings and the importance of secure configuration. 8. Consider deploying additional authentication or access control layers if supported by Cryostat or the hosting environment. 9. Monitor Red Hat security advisories for updates or exploit reports related to this vulnerability. 10. Integrate vulnerability scanning and configuration management tools to detect misconfigurations exposing the Cryostat API.

Description

A vulnerability was found in the Cryostat HTTP API. Cryostat's HTTP API binds to all network interfaces, allowing possible external visibility and access to the API port if Network Policies are disabled, allowing an unauthenticated, malicious attacker to jeopardize the environment.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to environments running Red Hat Cryostat 4 on RHEL 9, especially in development, testing, or production systems where Java profiling is critical. Unauthorized access to the Cryostat API can lead to leakage of sensitive profiling data, which may include application performance metrics and potentially sensitive runtime information. Attackers could manipulate or corrupt monitoring data, undermining trust in performance diagnostics and potentially masking other malicious activities. The confidentiality and integrity of monitoring data are at risk, which can affect incident response and system reliability assessments. While availability is not directly impacted, the indirect effects on operational security and compliance could be significant. Organizations in sectors such as finance, telecommunications, and critical infrastructure that rely on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Cryostat for Java application monitoring are particularly vulnerable. The risk is exacerbated in environments with weak network segmentation or disabled network policies, common in some cloud or containerized deployments. Given the medium severity and lack of known exploits, the threat is moderate but warrants prompt attention to prevent potential exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 21:42 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats