CVE-2024-25625
Pimcore Admin Classic Bundle ≤ 1.3.4
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-25625 is a high-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Pimcore Admin Classic Bundle. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-0490
Vulnerability Data
Pimcore's Admin Classic Bundle provides a Backend UI for Pimcore. A potential security vulnerability has been discovered in `pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle` prior to version 1.3.4. The vulnerability involves a Host Header Injection in the `invitationLinkAction` function of the UserController, specifically in the…
more
way `$loginUrl` trusts user input. The host header from incoming HTTP requests is used unsafely when generating URLs. An attacker can manipulate the HTTP host header in requests to the /admin/user/invitationlink endpoint, resulting in the generation of URLs with the attacker's domain. In fact, if a host header is injected in the POST request, the $loginURL parameter is constructed with this unvalidated host header. It is then used to send an invitation email to the provided user. This vulnerability can be used to perform phishing attacks by making the URLs in the invitation links emails point to an attacker-controlled domain. Version 1.3.4 contains a patch for the vulnerability. The maintainers recommend validating the host header and ensuring it matches the application's domain. It would also be beneficial to use a default trusted host or hostname if the incoming host header is not recognized or is absent.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.