CVE-2025-11290
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 identified in CRMEB up to 5.6.1. This affects an unknown function of the component JWT HMAC Secret Handler. Such manipulation of the argument secret with the input default leads to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is reported as difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. 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 · high confidenceCRMEB up to 5.6.1 contains a hard-coded JWT HMAC secret in the JWT handler component. The application uses a default/known secret value ('default') for signing and verifying JSON Web Tokens, allowing attackers to forge valid authentication tokens and impersonate any user by creating JWTs with the known secret.
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<= 5.6.1CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Check CRMEB versionLocate the version file or admin panel version display. Common locations include /version.php, a version constant in config files, or the admin dashboard 'About' section. Compare the installed version to the affected range <= 5.6.1.Affected if Installed version is 5.6.1 or lower
-
Locate JWT handler componentSearch the application codebase for files related to JWT handling. Look for files containing 'jwt', 'token', or 'auth' in filenames within the application source directory. Common paths may include /app/jwt, /app/middleware, or similar auth-related directories.Affected if JWT handler component exists in the application
-
Inspect JWT secret configurationOpen the JWT handler file(s) identified. Search for 'secret', 'key', or 'hmac' configuration entries. Look specifically for the string 'default' being used as the secret value for HMAC signing.Affected if The JWT secret is set to 'default' or another hard-coded value
-
Verify JWT signing uses HMACIn the JWT handler component, locate the algorithm configuration. Check if HS256, HS384, or HS512 (HMAC-based algorithms) are in use with a static secret rather than environment-driven or randomly-generated keys.Affected if HMAC algorithm is used with a hard-coded/static secret
If the installed CRMEB version is 5.6.1 or lower AND the JWT handler uses the hard-coded 'default' secret for HMAC signing, the environment is vulnerable to token forgery.
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 dataReplace the hard-coded JWT secret with a strong, randomly-generated key stored securely (e.g., environment variables or secrets management). Invalidate all existing tokens issued with the compromised secret to prevent continued abuse.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-11290 — 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-2025-11290 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