CVE-2025-42615 (GCVE-0-2025-42615)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-12-08 12:01 – Updated: 2025-12-08 20:10
VLAI?
Summary
In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username and password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without causing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for administrators. This lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly lowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and increases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP entropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into accounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks harder to detect and investigate. The patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user accounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the counter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in the admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP brute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious 2FA activity.This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.
Severity ?
8.1 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N
CWE
  • CWE-307 - Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
CIRCL Vulnerability-Lookup Affected: 0 , < 2.18.0 (semver)
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2025-42615",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-12-08T16:58:48.964002Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-12-08T20:10:21.202Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Vulnerability-Lookup",
          "vendor": "CIRCL",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "2.18.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed\n One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA)\n verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username \nand password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without \ncausing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for \nadministrators.\n\n\nThis lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly \nlowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and \nincreases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP \nentropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable\n tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into \naccounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks \nharder to detect and investigate.\n\n\nThe patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user \naccounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the \ncounter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in \nthe admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP \nbrute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious\n 2FA activity.\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed\n One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA)\n verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username \nand password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without \ncausing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for \nadministrators.\n\n\nThis lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly \nlowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and \nincreases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP \nentropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable\n tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into \naccounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks \nharder to detect and investigate.\n\n\nThe patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user \naccounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the \ncounter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in \nthe admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP \nbrute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious\n 2FA activity.This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 8.1,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "ACTIVE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-307",
              "description": "CWE-307 Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-12-08T12:01:05.831Z",
        "orgId": "a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158",
        "shortName": "ENISA"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/gcve-1-2025-0033"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts vulnerability in CIRCL Vulnerability-Lookup",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.5.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158",
    "assignerShortName": "ENISA",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-42615",
    "datePublished": "2025-12-08T12:01:05.831Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-04-16T12:34:02.866Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-12-08T20:10:21.202Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2025-42615\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\",\"published\":\"2025-12-08T12:16:03.497\",\"lastModified\":\"2025-12-08T18:26:19.900\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Awaiting Analysis\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed\\n One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA)\\n verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username \\nand password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without \\ncausing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for \\nadministrators.\\n\\n\\nThis lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly \\nlowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and \\nincreases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP \\nentropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable\\n tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into \\naccounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks \\nharder to detect and investigate.\\n\\n\\nThe patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user \\naccounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the \\ncounter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in \\nthe admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP \\nbrute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious\\n 2FA activity.This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV40\":[{\"source\":\"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"4.0\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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\",\"baseScore\":8.1,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"attackRequirements\":\"NONE\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"HIGH\",\"userInteraction\":\"ACTIVE\",\"vulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"vulnIntegrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"vulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subConfidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"subIntegrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subAvailabilityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"exploitMaturity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"confidentialityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"integrityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"availabilityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackVector\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackComplexity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackRequirements\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedPrivilegesRequired\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedUserInteraction\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Safety\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Automatable\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Recovery\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"valueDensity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"vulnerabilityResponseEffort\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"providerUrgency\":\"NOT_DEFINED\"}}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-307\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/gcve-1-2025-0033\",\"source\":\"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\"}]}}",
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2025-42615\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2025-12-08T16:58:48.964002Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-12-08T17:01:13.256Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts vulnerability in CIRCL Vulnerability-Lookup\", \"source\": {\"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"format\": \"CVSS\", \"cvssV4_0\": {\"Safety\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"version\": \"4.0\", \"Recovery\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"baseScore\": 8.1, \"Automatable\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"HIGH\", \"valueDensity\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N\", \"exploitMaturity\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"providerUrgency\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"userInteraction\": \"ACTIVE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"attackRequirements\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"HIGH\", \"subIntegrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnIntegrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"subAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"subConfidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"vulnConfidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"vulnerabilityResponseEffort\": \"NOT_DEFINED\"}, \"scenarios\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"GENERAL\"}]}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"CIRCL\", \"product\": \"Vulnerability-Lookup\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"0\", \"lessThan\": \"2.18.0\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}], \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\"}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/gcve-1-2025-0033\", \"tags\": [\"vendor-advisory\"]}], \"x_generator\": {\"engine\": \"Vulnogram 0.5.0\"}, \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed\\n One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA)\\n verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username \\nand password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without \\ncausing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for \\nadministrators.\\n\\n\\nThis lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly \\nlowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and \\nincreases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP \\nentropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable\\n tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into \\naccounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks \\nharder to detect and investigate.\\n\\n\\nThe patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user \\naccounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the \\ncounter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in \\nthe admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP \\nbrute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious\\n 2FA activity.This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.\", \"supportingMedia\": [{\"type\": \"text/html\", \"value\": \"In affected versions, vulnerability-lookup did not track or limit failed\\n One-Time Password (OTP) attempts during Two-Factor Authentication (2FA)\\n verification. An attacker who already knew or guessed a valid username \\nand password could submit an arbitrary number of OTP codes without \\ncausing the account to be locked or generating any specific alert for \\nadministrators.\\n\\n\\nThis lack of rate-limiting and lockout on OTP failures significantly \\nlowers the cost of online brute-force attacks against 2FA codes and \\nincreases the risk of successful account takeover, especially if OTP \\nentropy is reduced (e.g. short numeric codes, user reuse, or predictable\\n tokens). Additionally, administrators had no direct visibility into \\naccounts experiencing repeated 2FA failures, making targeted attacks \\nharder to detect and investigate.\\n\\n\\nThe patch introduces a persistent failed_otp_attempts counter on user \\naccounts, locks the user after 5 invalid OTP submissions, resets the \\ncounter on successful verification, and surfaces failed 2FA attempts in \\nthe admin user list. This enforces an account lockout policy for OTP \\nbrute-force attempts and improves monitoring capabilities for suspicious\\n 2FA activity.\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.\u003c/p\u003e\", \"base64\": false}]}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-307\", \"description\": \"CWE-307 Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\", \"shortName\": \"ENISA\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-12-08T12:01:05.831Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2025-42615\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2025-12-08T20:10:21.202Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2025-04-16T12:34:02.866Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158\", \"datePublished\": \"2025-12-08T12:01:05.831Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"ENISA\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.2"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.