A security vulnerability has been identified in the IBL Software Engineering Visual Weather…
CVE-2025-1077 is a critical-severity improper input validation vulnerability in Visual Weather from IBL Software Engineering, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 9.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected Visual Weather versions: 8.2.5; 7.3.9; 7.3.6 (Enterprise Build), and others listed below. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.89% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 60% of scored CVEs.
Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.
What to do
- Check which version of Visual Weather you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| IBL Software Engineering | Visual Weather | 8.2.5; 7.3.9; 7.3.6 (Enterprise Build); 8.5.2 (Enterprise Build) | Not stated |
| IBL Software Engineering | NAMIS | 8.2.5; 7.3.9; 7.3.6 (Enterprise Build); 8.5.2 (Enterprise Build) | Not stated |
| IBL Software Engineering | Aero Weather | 8.2.5; 7.3.9; 7.3.6 (Enterprise Build); 8.5.2 (Enterprise Build) | Not stated |
| IBL Software Engineering | Satellite Weather | 8.2.5; 7.3.9; 7.3.6 (Enterprise Build); 8.5.2 (Enterprise Build) | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- HighSuccess depends on conditions outside the attacker's control.
- Attack requirements
- PresentThe target must be in a specific state or configuration for the attack to work.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
- Confidentiality (other systems)
- HighSerious loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Integrity (other systems)
- HighSerious loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Availability (other systems)
- HighSerious loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (nbu.gov.sk).
Official description
A security vulnerability has been identified in the IBL Software Engineering Visual Weather and derived products (NAMIS, Aero Weather, Satellite Weather). The vulnerability is present in the Product Delivery Service (PDS) component in specific server configurations where the PDS pipeline utilizes the IPDS pipeline with Message Editor Output Filters enabled. A remote unauthenticated attacker can exploit this vulnerability to send unauthenticated requests to execute the IPDS pipeline with specially crafted Form Properties, enabling remote execution of arbitrary Python code. This vulnerability could lead to a full system compromise of the affected server, particularly if Visual Weather services are run under a privileged user account—contrary to the documented installation best practices. Upgrade to the patched versions 7.3.10 (or higher), 8.6.0 (or higher).
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.