CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2025-10908NVD status: Analyzed

WSO2 Identity Server: Incorrect Authorization

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2025-10908 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in WSO2 Identity Server from WSO2, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.3 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 6.0.0.249, 6.1.0.248, 7.0.0.124 as the first without the flaw, so updating WSO2 Identity Server to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.23% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update WSO2 Identity Server to 6.0.0.249 or 6.1.0.248 or 7.0.0.124 or 7.1.0.31, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Update WSO2 Carbon MagicLink Authenticator Module to 1.1.0.1 or 1.1.5.2 or 1.1.22.5 or 1.1.31.2, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  3. Update Identity Server to 6.0.0.249 or 6.1.0.248 or 7.0.0.124 or 7.1.0.31, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  4. Read the advisory on security.docs.wso2.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  5. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
WSO2WSO2 Identity Server6.0.0 up to, but not including, 6.0.0.249; 6.1.0 up to, but not including, 6.1.0.248; 7.0.0 up to, but not including, 7.0.0.124; 7.1.0 up to, but not including, 7.1.0.316.0.0.249, 6.1.0.248, 7.0.0.124, 7.1.0.31
WSO2WSO2 Carbon MagicLink Authenticator Module1.1.0 up to, but not including, 1.1.0.1; 1.1.5 up to, but not including, 1.1.5.2; 1.1.22 up to, but not including, 1.1.22.5; 1.1.31 up to, but not including, 1.1.31.21.1.0.1, 1.1.5.2, 1.1.22.5, 1.1.31.2
WSO2Identity Server6.0.0 up to, but not including, 6.0.0.249; 6.1.0 up to, but not including, 6.1.0.248; 7.0.0 up to, but not including, 7.0.0.124; 7.1.0 up to, but not including, 7.1.0.316.0.0.249, 6.1.0.248, 7.0.0.124, 7.1.0.31

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
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
LowSome restricted data can be read.
Integrity
LowLimited modification of data is possible.
Availability
LowPerformance or availability is reduced.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L. Scored by CISA (ADP).

Official description

Due to a lack of user account state validation during authentication, locked user accounts can be successfully authenticated using Magic Link or Pass Key methods. This bypasses the intended security control that should prevent access to accounts that have been locked. This vulnerability may allow unauthorized access to applications and sensitive data associated with accounts that should have been restricted via the account lock mechanism. It also undermines the effectiveness of the account lock mechanism intended to prevent further login attempts.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Incorrect Authorization

The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature.

More Incorrect Authorization vulnerabilities (CWE-863)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in WSO2 Identity Server

All WSO2 Identity Server vulnerabilities

Recent Incorrect Authorization vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.