CVE-2025-25192
Info Disclosure in Glpi-Project Glpi ≤ 10.0.18
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-25192 is a medium-severity Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (CWE-200) vulnerability in Glpi-Project Glpi. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Information Repositories (T1213); ranked at the 47th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-5392
Vulnerability Data
GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. Prior to version 10.0.18, a low privileged user can enable debug mode and access sensitive information. Version 10.0.18 contains a patch. As a workaround, one may delete the `install/update.php` file.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
The vulnerability enables low-privileged users to enable debug mode in GLPI, an enterprise IT asset and management application, facilitating unauthorized access to sensitive information from its data repositories.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces authorization policy so a low-privileged account cannot activate debug mode and thereby expose sensitive data.
Ensures low-privileged GLPI accounts are not granted the unnecessary privilege to toggle debug mode.
Requires disabling or restricting non-essential functions such as debug mode in production GLPI instances.
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.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces least-privilege authorization that blocks most unauthorized disclosures, yet CWE-200 also arises from logging, error messages, and side-channel paths that access controls alone do not address.
PR.DS-10 mostly prevents CWE-200 by directly eliminating unauthorized access to sensitive data-in-use, yet only partially addresses the weakness because CWE-200 spans many other exposure vectors outside runtime protection.
PR.IR-01's segmentation/zero-trust controls largely eliminate network-level unauthorized access paths that enable exposure, yet CWE-200 spans many additional vectors (API responses, logs, app logic) that network controls alone cannot close.
Secure SDLC practices catch most exposure flaws via design, testing and release controls, yet CWE-200 spans runtime/config issues a single development outcome cannot fully close.
PR.AA-01 supplies proper credential lifecycle controls that reduce unauthorized access paths, yet leaves many other exposure vectors (error messages, logging, side channels, etc.) unaddressed.
Authentication verifies actor identity and is a prerequisite for access decisions, yet addresses only one facet of the broad set of exposure vectors in CWE-200.
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.
Restricting anonymous or unknown access and encrypting high-value information limits the exposure of sensitive data that would otherwise be obtainable by unauthorized actors.
Suppressing system details, error specifics, and previous log-on information until successful authentication reduces the information an unauthenticated attacker can gather.
By requiring owners to assign sensitivity labels and corresponding handling rules, the control ensures that information is not left unmarked and therefore reduces the chance that sensitive data will be exposed to unauthorized actors.
Requiring encryption, access controls, and recipient authentication for transfers directly reduces the chance that sensitive data reaches an unauthorized observer.
Secure delivery, protected storage, and confidentiality of allocation records limit exposure of authentication material to unauthorized observers.
Requiring defined procedures, assigned roles, and technical/organizational measures for handling PII reduces the chance that sensitive personal data will be exposed to unauthorized actors through inadequate handling or missing safeguards.