CVE-2025-48952
Netalertx ≤ 25.6.7
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:LSummary
CVE-2025-48952 is a critical-severity Incorrect Comparison (CWE-697) vulnerability in Netalertx Netalertx. Its CVSS base score is 9.4 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027); ranked at the 40th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-20092
Vulnerability Data
NetAlertX is a network, presence scanner, and alert framework. Prior to version 25.6.7, a vulnerability in the authentication logic allows users to bypass password verification using SHA-256 magic hashes, due to loose comparison in PHP. In vulnerable versions of the…
more
application, a password comparison is performed using the `==` operator at line 40 in front/index.php. This introduces a security issue where specially crafted "magic hash" values that evaluate to true in a loose comparison can bypass authentication. Because of the use of `==` instead of the strict `===`, different strings that begin with 0e and are followed by only digits can be interpreted as scientific notation (i.e., zero) and treated as equal. This issue falls under the Login Bypass vulnerability class. Users with certain "weird" passwords that produce magic hashes are particularly affected. Services relying on this logic are at risk of unauthorized access. Version 25.6.7 fixes the vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly exercises security-relevant comparisons to discover incorrect logic.
A reference monitor must be small and correct, structurally limiting the chance of flawed comparison logic in authorization decisions.
Security engineering principles require correct implementation of comparison logic used for access and authentication decisions.
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 require correct logic for security comparisons and thereby prevent this class of flaw.
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 can detect incorrect comparison flaws before deployment.
Secure development lifecycle includes code review and testing that can catch incorrect comparison logic.
Application security requirements can mandate correct comparison logic for security decisions.
Secure architecture principles can require robust comparison mechanisms for access decisions.
Secure coding standards directly address avoiding incorrect comparison operators and logic.
Secure authentication mechanisms rely on correct comparison of credentials or tokens.