Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-6105

Access Control in Jflyfox Jfinal Cms 5.0.1

Published
16 June 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v4 2.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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 0.0026 18th percentile
Risk Priority 15 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-6105 is a low-severity CSRF (CWE-352) vulnerability in Jflyfox Jfinal Cms. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 18th 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 AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-25 (Reference Monitor) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability has been found in jflyfox jfinal_cms 5.0.1 and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the file HOME.java. The manipulation of the argument Logout leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The…

more

exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
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.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
T1556 Modify Authentication Process Defense Impairment
Adversaries may modify authentication mechanisms and processes to access user credentials or enable otherwise unwarranted access to accounts.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-13203Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-4282Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-8223Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-5885Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-2420Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-6864Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-9747Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-5732Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2025-3257Shared CWE-352, CWE-862
CVE-2023-0335Shared CWE-352, CWE-862

Affected Assets

jflyfox
jfinal cms
5.0.1

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 5 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.3.2
  • V3.5.1
  • V10.2.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

AC-3 directly requires enforcement of authorization decisions on every access request, structurally eliminating missing authorization checks.

AC-24 mandates that access control decisions are applied to each request, preventing bypass of authorization logic.

AC-25 requires a tamperproof, always-invoked reference monitor that ensures authorization checks cannot be omitted.

AC-6 reduces the set of actions reachable without proper authorization, limiting blast radius of missing checks.

Protecting session authenticity prevents attackers from replaying or forging authenticated requests via the victim's browser.

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 full match
prevents

Explicitly requires defining, enforcing, and reviewing authorizations and least privilege, directly preventing missing authorization checks.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require anti-CSRF controls such as tokens or SameSite attributes.

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

Requiring authentication and credentials before any access occurs eliminates the absence of authorization checks that would otherwise allow an unauthenticated actor to reach protected resources.

prevents

Requiring formal authorization of every access request before rights are granted ensures that checks for required permissions are performed, preventing missing authorization checks from being introduced.

prevents

Mandatory authorization checks and central records of granted rights ensure that every access attempt is preceded by an explicit decision rather than relying on missing checks.

mitigates

Segregating the approval of access rights from their implementation provides an independent check that reduces the impact of missing authorization checks in the resulting system configuration.

finds

By requiring competent outsiders to verify that every function enforces the need-to-know principle, the control lowers the likelihood that missing authorization checks persist undetected.

prevents

Defining authorization responsibilities and reviewing risk-treatment progress throughout the project lifecycle catches missing authorization checks before the system is deployed.

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-248581 OL 8 must require users to provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
  • V-252656 The OL 8 operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
RHEL 7 (2 rules)
  • V-251704 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must not be configured to bypass password requirements for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862
  • V-204429 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must be configured so that users must provide a password for privilege escalation. prevents CWE-862

References