CVE-2025-9513VulnerabilityPublished 27 Aug 2025Updated 28 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-9513: editso fuso · Inadequate Encryption Strength

Affects editso fusoSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 4% 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:X

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

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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 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 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
editso fuso	Affected =1.0.4-beta.0 =1.0.4-beta.1 =1.0.4-beta.2 =1.0.4-beta.3 =1.0.4-beta.4 =1.0.4-beta.5 =1.0.4-beta.6 =1.0.4-beta.7	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading or patching 'fuso' to versions beyond 1.0.4-beta.7 once official fixes are released. In the interim, organizations should audit their deployments to identify affected versions and restrict network exposure of vulnerable instances, ideally isolating them from untrusted networks. Employing additional layers of encryption or VPN tunnels can help mitigate the risk of interception. Monitoring network traffic for unusual handshake patterns or cryptographic anomalies may provide early detection of exploitation attempts. Organizations should also review cryptographic configurations and consider disabling or replacing the affected handshake mechanism if feasible. Engaging with the vendor for timely patches and security advisories is critical. Finally, enforcing strict access controls and network segmentation reduces the attack surface and limits potential impact.

Description

A flaw has been found in editso fuso up to 1.0.4-beta.7. This affects the function PenetrateRsaAndAesHandshake of the file src/net/penetrate/handshake/mod.rs. This manipulation of the argument priv_key causes inadequate encryption strength. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitability is reported as difficult.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to confidentiality of communications relying on the affected 'fuso' software versions. If 'fuso' is used in critical infrastructure, enterprise applications, or secure communications, attackers could exploit this flaw to intercept or decrypt sensitive data remotely. Given the high attack complexity, exploitation is less likely by opportunistic attackers but remains a concern for advanced persistent threats or state-sponsored actors targeting European entities. The confidentiality breach could lead to exposure of intellectual property, personal data protected under GDPR, or sensitive operational information. This could result in regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and operational disruptions. Since the vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability, direct system disruption or data tampering risks are lower. However, compromised encryption could be a stepping stone for further attacks or lateral movement within networks.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…