CVE-2025-0159
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIBM FlashSystem (IBM Storage Virtualize (8.5.0.0 through 8.5.0.13, 8.5.1.0, 8.5.2.0 through 8.5.2.3, 8.5.3.0 through 8.5.3.1, 8.5.4.0, 8.6.0.0 through 8.6.0.5, 8.6.1.0, 8.6.2.0 through 8.6.2.1, 8.6.3.0, 8.7.0.0 through 8.7.0.2, 8.7.1.0, 8.7.2.0 through 8.7.2.1) could allow a remote attacker to bypass RPCAdapter endpoint authentication by sending a specifically crafted HTTP request.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceIBM Storage Virtualize (FlashSystem) versions 8.5.0.0 through 8.7.2.1 contain a critical authentication bypass vulnerability in the RPCAdapter endpoint. A remote attacker can bypass authentication by sending a specifically crafted HTTP request, potentially gaining unauthorized access to the storage system.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 8.5, < 8.5.0.14>= 8.5.2.0, <= 8.5.2.3>= 8.6.0.0, < 8.6.0.6>= 8.7.0.0, < 8.7.0.3= 8.5.1.0= 8.5.3.0= 8.5.3.1= 8.5.4.0= 8.6.1.0= 8.6.2.0= 8.6.2.1= 8.6.3.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Storage Virtualize versionRun the command `lssystem` or `lsversion` on the storage system CLI to retrieve the exact firmware versionAffected if The displayed version matches any of these: 8.5.0.0-8.5.0.13, 8.5.2.0-8.5.2.3, 8.5.1.0, 8.5.3.0, 8.5.3.1, 8.5.4.0, 8.6.0.0-8.6.0.5, 8.6.1.0, 8.6.2.0, 8.6.2.1, 8.6.3.0, 8.7.0.0-8.7.0.2, or 8.7.2.0-8.7.2.1
-
Verify RPCAdapter service statusCheck if the RPCAdapter endpoint is enabled by running `lssvc -detail` or reviewing the service configuration via the management GUI under Network SettingsAffected if RPCAdapter is listed as active or enabled and the version falls within the affected ranges above
-
Confirm network exposure of RPCAdapter portExamine listening ports using `netstat -an | grep <rpcadapter_port>` or review firewall rules to determine if the RPCAdapter port (typically 8443 or as configured) is exposed to untrusted networksAffected if The RPCAdapter port is open to external network interfaces and the version is within the affected ranges
The system is affected if it runs any version from 8.5.0.0 through 8.7.2.1 that matches the specific affected version ranges AND has the RPCAdapter endpoint enabled and network-accessible.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped8.5.0.148.6.0.68.7.0.3
Apply the relevant IBM fix pack or upgrade to a patched version of Storage Virtualize. If patching is delayed, restrict network access to the RPCAdapter endpoint and monitor for unauthorized access attempts.
8.5.0.14 (for 8.5.x), 8.6.0.6 (for 8.6.x), or 8.7.0.3 (for 8.7.x)
- Identify the currently installed Storage Virtualize version using the 'lsversion' command or through the management GUI
- Based on your current version, upgrade to the minimum fixed release: For 8.5.x (8.5.0.0-8.5.0.13, 8.5.1.0, 8.5.2.0-8.5.2.3, 8.5.3.x, 8.5.4.0) upgrade to 8.5.0.14; For 8.6.x (8.6.0.0-8.6.0.5, 8.6.1.0, 8.6.2.0-8.6.2.1, 8.6.3.0) upgrade to 8.6.0.6; For 8.7.x (8.7.0.0-8.7.0.2, 8.7.1.0, 8.7.2.0-8.7.2.1) upgrade to 8.7.0.3
- Follow IBM's standard upgrade procedure: download the upgrade image from IBM Fix Central, upload to the system using the 'updatewiz' or management GUI, and apply the update
- After upgrade, verify the fix by checking the system version and confirming RPCAdapter endpoint authentication is enforced
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-0159 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-0159 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data