xwiki-platform: Improper Authorization
CVE-2025-48063 is a high-severity improper authorization vulnerability in xwiki-platform from XWiki, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. Affected xwiki-platform versions: >= 16.10.0-rc-1, < 16.10.4; >= 17.0.0-rc-1, < 17.1.0-rc-1. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 1.03% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 64% of scored CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Xwiki to 16.10.4 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| XWiki | xwiki-platform | >= 16.10.0-rc-1, < 16.10.4; >= 17.0.0-rc-1, < 17.1.0-rc-1 | Not stated |
| XWiki | Xwiki | 16.10.0 up to, but not including, 16.10.4; 17.0.0 | 16.10.4 |
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
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 4.8 | Medium | CNA (github.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 8.8 | High | NVD |
Official description
XWiki is a generic wiki platform. In XWiki 16.10.0, required rights were introduced as a way to limit which rights a document can have. Part of the security model of required rights is that a user who doesn't have a right also cannot define that right as required right. That way, users who are editing documents on which required rights are enforced can be sure that they're not giving a right to a script or object that it didn't have before. A bug in the implementation of the enforcement of this rule means that in fact, it was possible for any user with edit right on a document to set programming right as required right. If then a user with programming right edited that document, the content of that document would gain programming right, allowing remote code execution. This thereby defeats most of the security benefits of required rights. As XWiki still performs the required rights analysis when a user edits a page even when required rights are enforced, the user with programming right would still be warned about the dangerous content unless the attacker managed to bypass this check. Note also that none of the affected versions include a UI for enabling the enforcing of required rights so it seems unlikely that anybody relied on them for security in the affected versions. As this vulnerability provides no additional attack surface unless all documents in the wiki enforce required rights, we consider the impact of this attack to be low even though gaining programming right could have a high impact. This vulnerability has been patched in XWiki 16.10.4 and 17.1.0RC1. No known workarounds are available except for upgrading.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Authorization
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
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 you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply 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.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Advisories
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in xwiki-platform
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.3 Critical severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Recent Improper Authorization vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.3 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.