CVE-2025-2950
Ibm I 7.3 … 7.6
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-2950 is a medium-severity Improper Neutralization of HTTP Headers for Scripting Syntax (CWE-644) vulnerability in Ibm I. Its CVSS base score is 5.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Content Injection (T1659); ranked at the 21th 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 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-2025-11872
Vulnerability Data
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.5 is vulnerable to a host header injection attack caused by improper neutralization of HTTP header content by IBM Navigator for i. An authenticated user can manipulate the host header in HTTP requests to…
more
change domain/IP address which may lead to unexpected behavior.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V4.2.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly requires checking/neutralizing untrusted data such as HTTP headers before they reach browser components.
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 proper output encoding and header sanitization to prevent scripting injection.
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 catches header-injection issues before release, covering most of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevents header-injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralizing untrusted data in HTTP headers.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe header-specific controls.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping or rejection of scripting syntax in HTTP headers.