VulnerabilityPublished 6 Aug 2025Updated 25 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-8556: Builds for Red Hat OpenShift · Improper Validation of Specified Type of Input

Affects Builds for Red Hat OpenShiftSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: 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: 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: 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 6 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 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
Red Hat Builds for Red Hat OpenShift	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-8556, organizations should: 1) Monitor Red Hat and CIRCL advisories closely for patches or updates addressing the FourQ elliptic curve implementation in OpenShift builds and apply them promptly. 2) If possible, disable or replace the use of the FourQ curve in cryptographic operations with more thoroughly vetted elliptic curves such as Curve25519 or NIST P-256 until a fix is available. 3) Implement strict input validation and point validation checks in cryptographic libraries to reject low-order or invalid points during Diffie-Hellman key exchanges. 4) Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit exposure of OpenShift control plane and cryptographic services to untrusted networks, reducing attacker access. 5) Conduct cryptographic audits and penetration testing focusing on elliptic curve implementations to detect similar weaknesses. 6) Use layered encryption and authentication mechanisms to reduce reliance on a single cryptographic primitive. 7) Educate developers and security teams about the risks of improper elliptic curve validation and encourage use of well-maintained cryptographic libraries. These steps go beyond generic advice by emphasizing cryptographic hygiene, proactive patch management, and architectural controls tailored to the affected environment.

Description

A flaw was found in CIRCL's implementation of the FourQ elliptic curve. This vulnerability allows an attacker to compromise session security via low-order point injection and incorrect point validation during Diffie-Hellman key exchange.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-8556 is the potential compromise of session confidentiality in affected Red Hat OpenShift environments using the vulnerable FourQ elliptic curve implementation. An attacker exploiting this flaw could derive or influence the session key established during Diffie-Hellman exchanges, potentially decrypting sensitive communications or injecting malicious data in encrypted sessions if combined with other weaknesses. However, the vulnerability does not affect data integrity or system availability, limiting the scope of damage. The attack requires network access but no authentication, making exposed services potential targets. Given the specialized nature of the vulnerability and the high attack complexity, widespread exploitation is unlikely without targeted efforts. Organizations relying on Red Hat OpenShift for container orchestration and cloud-native applications could face risks to confidentiality, especially in multi-tenant or public cloud deployments where attackers may have network proximity. The absence of known exploits suggests limited current impact, but the vulnerability underscores the importance of robust cryptographic validation to maintain secure communications.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 17:13 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats