Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-65028 is a medium-severity Improper Authorization (CWE-285) vulnerability in Rallly Rallly. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Information Repositories (T1213); ranked at the 17th 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-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-198225
Vulnerability Data
Rallly is an open-source scheduling and collaboration tool. Prior to version 4.5.4, an insecure direct object reference (IDOR) vulnerability allows any authenticated user to modify other participants’ votes in polls without authorization. The backend relies solely on the participantId parameter…
more
to identify which votes to update, without verifying ownership or poll permissions. This allows an attacker to alter poll results in their favor, directly compromising data integrity. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.4.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
IDOR (CWE-639/862) enables unauthorized modification of other users' poll votes (T1565.001: Stored Data Manipulation) and access to data in a collaboration repository (T1213: Data from Information Repositories).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires the system to enforce authorization checks on every access to participant vote objects rather than trusting the client-supplied participantId.
Limits each authenticated user to only the minimal set of vote objects they are permitted to modify, preventing unauthorized cross-participant updates.
Requires validation of the participantId parameter against the authenticated user's ownership and poll context before allowing vote modifications.
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.
Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.
Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.
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 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.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.
Security testing can detect missing authorization checks but does not prevent the weakness in production.
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.
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.
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.
Managing access rights includes ensuring users can only access their own records and not bypass authorization by altering identifiers.
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.