CVE-2025-10992
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was determined in roncoo roncoo-pay up to 9428382af21cd5568319eae7429b7e1d0332ff40. Affected is an unknown function of the file /user/info/lookupList. Executing manipulation can lead to improper authorization. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product utilizes a rolling release system for continuous delivery, and as such, version information for affected or updated releases is not disclosed. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 · moderate confidenceThe vulnerability exists in the /user/info/lookupList endpoint of roncoo-pay, a Java-based payment system. The issue is improper authorization, likely allowing unauthenticated or unauthorized users to access sensitive user information through this endpoint. The attack can be executed remotely without authentication.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify roncoo-pay installationSearch for roncoo-pay application files, WAR archives, or running Java processes related to payment systemAffected if roncoo-pay payment system is present in the environment
-
Determine roncoo-pay versionLocate version file, pom.xml, or application metadata that indicates the installed version; compare against any known version releasesAffected if installed version matches or precedes versions where the endpoint lacks authorization controls
-
Verify endpoint existenceCheck if the application exposes the /user/info/lookupList endpoint by reviewing deployed web.xml, routing configuration, or attempting to access the URLAffected if the /user/info/lookupList endpoint is present and accessible
-
Test unauthorized access to endpointSend a request to /user/info/lookupList without providing authentication credentials or session cookies; observe if the application returns user information without rejecting the requestAffected if the endpoint returns sensitive data or accepts the request without authentication failure
-
Review endpoint authorization configurationExamine application security configuration files, Spring Security settings, or filter mappings to determine if /user/info/lookupList has role-based access controls definedAffected if no authorization constraints are defined for the /user/info/lookupList endpoint
A defender is affected if roncoo-pay is deployed and the /user/info/lookupList endpoint returns user data without requiring authentication or valid authorization credentials.
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.
From vendor dataSince the vendor did not respond, implement manual source code review to add proper authentication and role-based authorization checks on the /user/info/lookupList endpoint before deployment. Restrict access to authenticated users with appropriate privileges.
- 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-2025-10992 — 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-2025-10992 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