Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-29972 is a critical-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Microsoft Azure Storage Resource Provider. Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 13% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-29972 is a server-side request forgery vulnerability, tracked under CWE-918, that affects the Azure Storage Resource Provider. The flaw carries a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.9 and permits an attacker to induce the server into making unauthorized requests to internal or external resources.
An authorized attacker with network access can exploit the issue to perform spoofing attacks. Successful exploitation can result in high impact to confidentiality, integrity, and availability, with the attack crossing security boundaries due to the changed scope in the CVSS vector.
The Microsoft Security Response Center advisory for CVE-2025-29972 is available at https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2025-29972. The associated EPSS score remains low, with a current value of 0.0573 and a peak of 0.0593.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-14050
Vulnerability Data
Server-side request forgery (ssrf) in Azure Storage Resource Provider allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.6V1.5.3V5.3.2V10.4.7
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.
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 development practices directly include input validation and destination allow-listing that prevent SSRF.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
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.
Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.