Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-48063

Access Control in Xwiki 16.10.0 – 16.10.4

Public PoCAccess Control
Published
21 May 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 4.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0090 56th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-48063 is a medium-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Xwiki Xwiki. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 44% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — 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.

XWiki, a generic wiki platform, contains a flaw in its required rights security model that was introduced in version 16.10.0. The model intends to prevent users without a given right from designating that right as required on a document, thereby protecting editors from inadvertently escalating privileges on scripts or objects. A bug in the enforcement logic allows any user possessing only edit rights to designate programming rights as required on a document.

An attacker with edit access can therefore mark a page as requiring programming rights. When a user who holds programming rights subsequently edits the page, the document content receives those rights and can execute arbitrary code. The attack surface remains limited because the vulnerability only becomes exploitable when required rights enforcement is active on all documents, a configuration that affected releases do not expose through any user interface.

The issue is resolved in XWiki 16.10.4 and 17.1.0RC1; the project advisory and associated commits recommend upgrading as the sole mitigation, with no other workarounds identified. The EPSS score remains flat at 0.0488 with no material increase after disclosure.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

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…

more

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.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1548.001 Setuid and Setgid Privilege Escalation
An adversary may abuse configurations where an application has the setuid or setgid bits set in order to get code running in a different (and possibly more privileged) user’s context.
T1548.002 Bypass User Account Control Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may bypass UAC mechanisms to elevate process privileges on system.
T1548.003 Sudo and Sudo Caching Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may perform sudo caching and/or use the sudoers file to elevate privileges.
T1574.005 Executable Installer File Permissions Weakness Stealth
Adversaries may execute their own malicious payloads by hijacking the binaries used by an installer.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-32972Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2023-48241Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2025-29926Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2024-38369Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2025-49586Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2023-46244Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2025-32971Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2023-26056Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2023-50732Same product: Xwiki Xwiki
CVE-2023-35166Same product: Xwiki Xwiki

Affected Assets

xwiki
xwiki
17.0.0 · 16.10.0 — 16.10.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Mandates that access-control decisions are made and applied to each request before access occurs.

Requires a tamperproof, always-invoked reference monitor that performs authorization checks.

Directly requires enforcement of approved authorizations for every access request, stopping improper or missing checks.

Limits granted privileges so that even a bypassed check affects fewer resources.

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 mostly match
prevents

PR.AA-05 mostly prevents CWE-285 via enforced policy, reviews, and least-privilege authorization decisions, yet CWE-285 remains only partially prevented because code-level check omissions or errors can still occur outside that single control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices catch and eliminate most authorization defects before release, yet a single broad outcome cannot address every design, role, and runtime facet of CWE-285.

PR.AA-01 partial match
prevents

PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities and access-request workflows that can support downstream authorization decisions, yet does nothing to enforce or verify authorization checks inside a product, leaving CWE-285 fully unaddressed by this control alone.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network segmentation/zero-trust limits external reachability (partial prevention of exploitation) but leaves application-level authorization logic untouched, so the CWE remains fully introducible and only one facet of its risk is addressed.

PR.PS-05 none match
prevents

PR.PS-05 blocks unauthorized binaries/DNS while CWE-285 is an in-product authorization-check defect, so the control neither prevents the weakness nor removes any of its risk.

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.

prevents

Granular, policy-driven assignment of permissions and dynamic enforcement of those permissions prevent the incorrect or missing authorization decisions that lead to improper authorization flaws.

prevents

By requiring documented authorization rules and periodic policy reviews, the control makes it less likely that authorization decisions will be omitted or implemented inconsistently across applications.

prevents

Mapping access rights to information classification and business requirements forces correct enforcement of authorization decisions, blocking the incorrect authorization weakness at the policy and implementation stage.

finds

Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.

finds

By requiring managers to verify that authorization decisions match policy and to remediate deviations, the control limits the persistence of incorrect or missing authorization checks.

prevents

Requiring authorization processes and privilege assignments to be specified during project initiation prevents downstream components from receiving overly broad or incorrect rights that would allow unauthorized actions.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
  • V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
  • V-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
RHEL 7 (3 rules)
  • V-204429 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
  • V-204430 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must re-authenticate for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
  • V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
  • V-251712 The RHEL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-285

References