CVE-2023-25495: A valid, authenticated administrative user can query a web interface API to reveal the configured LDAP client password used by XCC to authen
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 19/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.56% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. Administrator privileges are required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
A valid, authenticated administrative user can query a web interface API to reveal the configured LDAP client password used by XCC to authenticate to an external LDAP server in certain configurations. There is no exposure where no LDAP client password is configured
- Published
- Apr 28, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.5% · 47th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-522
Report tools
Action score
19
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 19 / 40 · 4.9 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.5%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 4.9
- CNA · lenovo
- 4.9
- agree
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| lenovo | thinkagile hx5530 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_hx5530_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx5530 | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_hx5530 |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx7530 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_hx7530_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx7530 | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_hx7530 |
| lenovo | thinkagile vx3331 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_vx3331_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile vx3331 | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_vx3331 |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx enclosure firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_hx_enclosure_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx enclosure | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_hx_enclosure |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx1021 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_hx1021_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx1021 | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_hx1021 |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx1320 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:lenovo:thinkagile_hx1320_firmware |
| lenovo | thinkagile hx1320 | cpe:2.3:h:lenovo:thinkagile_hx1320 |
and 188 more
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- lenovo thinkagile hx enclosure firmwarebefore 3.72_tei388s
- lenovo thinkagile hx1021 firmwarebefore 3.72_tei388s
- lenovo thinkagile hx1320 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx1321 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx1331 firmwarebefore 2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx1520-r firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx1521-r firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx2320-e firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx2321 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx2330 firmwarebefore 2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx2330 firmware2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx2331 firmwarebefore 2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx2720-e firmwarebefore 3.72_tei388s
- lenovo thinkagile hx3320 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx3321 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
- lenovo thinkagile hx3330 firmwarebefore 2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx3331 firmwarebefore 4.71_d8bt48p
- lenovo thinkagile hx3331 firmwarebefore 2.93_afbt30p
- lenovo thinkagile hx3375 firmwarebefore 4.71_d8bt48p
- lenovo thinkagile hx3376 firmwarebefore 8.88_cdi3a4a
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (lenovo). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Lenovo XClarity Controller
- Refer to Mitigation strategy section in LEN-99936affected
Same product
lenovo: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2023-4607An authenticated XCC user can change permissions for any user through a crafted API command.35Monitor
- CVE-2023-25492A valid, authenticated user may be able to trigger a denial of service of the XCC web user interface or other undefined behavior through a f35Monitor
- CVE-2023-0683A valid, authenticated XCC user with read only access may gain elevated privileges through a specifically crafted API call.35Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-29057Apr 28, 2023 · A valid XCC user's local account permissions overrides their active directory permissions under specific configurations.35Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2023-29058Apr 28, 2023 · A valid, authenticated XCC user with read-only permissions can modify custom user roles on other user accounts and the user trespass message26Monitor
- Later →CVE-2023-29056Apr 28, 2023 · A valid LDAP user, under specific conditions, will default to read-only permissions when authenticating into XCC.23Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-522 · Insufficiently Protected CredentialsCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Session SidejackingCAPEC-102likelihood: High · High
- Signature Spoofing by Key TheftCAPEC-474likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Recovery ExploitationCAPEC-50likelihood: Medium · High
- KerberoastingCAPEC-509High
- Modify Existing ServiceCAPEC-551
- Remote Services with Stolen CredentialsCAPEC-555Very High
- Use of Known Domain CredentialsCAPEC-560likelihood: High · High
- Windows Admin Shares with Stolen CredentialsCAPEC-561
ATT&CK techniques
- Remote ServicesT1021
- Remote Services:SMB/Windows Admin SharesT1021.002
- Valid AccountsT1078
- Brute Force:Credential StuffingT1110.004
- Email Collection:Remote Email CollectionT1114.002
- External Remote ServicesT1133
- Create or Modify System ProcessT1543
- Use Alternate Authentication Material:Pass The HashT1550.002
- Use Alternate Authentication Material:Pass The TicketT1550.003
- Unsecured Credentials: Private KeysT1552.004
- Steal or Forge Kerberos TicketsT1558
- Steal or Forge Kerberos Tickets:KerberoastingT1558.003
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.