dbcve.org
Security Verify AccessApplication · Ibm

CVE-2025-0163

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-06-11
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 10.0.9 or later.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
IBM Security Verify Access Appliance and Docker 10.0 through 10.0.8 could allow a remote attacker to enumerate usernames due to an observable response discrepancy of disabled accounts.

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 confidence

IBM Security Verify Access versions 10.0 through 10.0.8 contains a username enumeration vulnerability where the authentication response differs between valid disabled accounts and invalid/non-existent accounts, allowing remote attackers to confirm which usernames exist in the system by observing these response discrepancies.

MitigationConfigure the authentication system to return identical responses (timing, content, HTTP status codes) for all invalid username scenarios regardless of account existence or enabled/disabled status.

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
Security Verify AccessApplication
Affected:>= 10.0.0, < 10.0.9
Security Verify Access DockerApplication
Affected:>= 10.0.0, < 10.0.9

CVSS 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
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine installed IBM Security Verify Access version
    Run 'docker ps' to find the container, then 'docker exec <container> cat /opt/ibm/verify/var/VERSION' or check the product version through the admin console under System > Settings > Version Information
    Affected if Installed version is 10.0.0 through 10.0.8 (less than 10.0.9)
  2. Identify the authentication endpoint
    Locate the login endpoint URL typically at /iam/access/v8/authenticate or /login on the Verify Access web interface or API gateway
    Affected if The authentication endpoint is externally accessible
  3. Test authentication response for a known disabled account
    Send a login request with a valid but disabled username and record the HTTP status code, response body, and response headers
    Affected if Response is received (not an immediate generic error)
  4. Test authentication response for a non-existent account
    Send a login request with a random non-existent username and record the HTTP status code, response body, and response headers
    Affected if Response is received (not an immediate generic error)
  5. Compare response differences
    Compare the responses from steps 3 and 4 - check for differences in HTTP status codes, error messages, timing, or any indication that the system acknowledges the username exists
    Affected if The responses differ between a disabled valid account and a non-existent account, confirming username enumeration is possible

If IBM Security Verify Access versions 10.0.0-10.0.8 are running with an accessible authentication endpoint that returns different responses for disabled valid accounts versus non-existent accounts, the environment is vulnerable to username enumeration.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 10.0.9 or later
Fixed in 10.0.9
Interim mitigation

Configure the authentication system to return identical responses (timing, content, HTTP status codes) for all invalid username scenarios regardless of account existence or enabled/disabled status.

Recommended fix High confidence

Security Verify Access and Security Verify Access Docker version 10.0.9

  1. 1. Review the IBM Security Verify Access 10.0.9 release notes and upgrade documentation for any prerequisites or migration considerations
  2. 2. Create a complete backup of the current Security Verify Access configuration
  3. 3. If running the Appliance version, use the IBM provided upgrade procedure to update from 10.0.x to 10.0.9
  4. 4. If running the Docker version, pull and deploy the updated Docker image for version 10.0.9
  5. 5. After upgrade, verify that the username enumeration vulnerability is resolved by testing account responses
  6. 6. Confirm normal authentication functionality continues to work as expected
Caveat Review release notes for any configuration changes or migration requirements between 10.0.x and 10.0.9

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Security Verify Access Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,460
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,536.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-0163 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-0163 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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