VulnerabilityPublished 11 May 2026

CVE-2025-8325: The software fails to enforce role-based access controls for certain Gateway API invocations

Source GCVE Database

Authoritative record:CVE-2025-8325· Medium 6.3

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium : upgrade to 4.5.0.18 when convenient.

Data as of 27 Oct 2026, 03:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

Patch: Available – fixed in 4.5.0.18, 4.5.0.17, 4.4.0.33 +14

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

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

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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 May 2026
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.

ghsa-xh36-jjpq-3cmr

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
WSO2WSO2 API Control Plane	Affected >=4.5.0 <4.5.0.18	Fixed in 4.5.0.18
WSO2WSO2 Universal Gateway	Affected >=4.5.0 <4.5.0.17	Fixed in 4.5.0.17
WSO2WSO2 Traffic Manager	Affected >=4.5.0 <4.5.0.17	Fixed in 4.5.0.17
WSO2WSO2 API Manager	Affected >=4.5.0 <4.5.0.17	Fixed in 4.5.0.17
WSO2WSO2 API Manager	Affected >=4.4.0 <4.4.0.33	Fixed in 4.4.0.33
WSO2WSO2 API Manager	Affected >=4.3.0 <4.3.0.70	Fixed in 4.3.0.70

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Since this is not a cloud service, remediation depends on vendor advisories or updates from WSO2. Until then, consider restricting access to the Gateway API to trusted users and review role assignments to minimize exposure.

Description

CVE-2025-8325 is a vulnerability in WSO2 API Manager 3.x where role-based access controls are not properly enforced for certain Gateway and Internal Service API invocations. Users assigned the 'Internal/Everyone' role can bypass intended permission checks and perform sensitive operations on the Gateway REST API regardless of their actual privileges. This flaw could lead to unauthorized actions and unintended behavior in affected deployments.

Impact

An attacker with a valid user account but limited privileges can bypass role-based access controls to invoke sensitive Gateway REST APIs and Internal Service APIs. This unauthorized access could lead to information disclosure, integrity violations, or availability impacts depending on the operations performed. The vulnerability undermines the intended security model of the API Manager, increasing risk of misuse or operational disruption.

CWE-281Improper Preservation of Permissions (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not preserve permissions or incorrectly preserves permissions when copying, restoring, or sharing objects, which can cause them to have less restrictive permissions than intended.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Oct 2026, 03:58 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-281

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats