CVE-2025-12808
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 · uneditedImproper access control in Devolutions allows a View-only user to retrieve sensitive third-level nested fields, such as password lists custom values, resulting in password disclosure. This issue affects the following versions : * Devolutions Server 2025.3.2.0 through 2025.3.5.0 * Devolutions Server 2025.2.15.0 and earlier
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 confidenceImproper access control in Devolutions Server allows View-only users to retrieve sensitive third-level nested fields (password lists custom values), bypassing intended permission restrictions and exposing password data to users who should have read-only, non-sensitive access.
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< 2025.2.17.0>= 2025.3.2.0, < 2025.3.6.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 the installed Devolutions Server versionAccess the server administration console or check the application version information typically found in Help > About or server logsAffected if The version number is less than 2025.2.17.0 OR between 2025.3.2.0 and 2025.3.5.0 (inclusive)
-
Locate View-only role configurationNavigate to Administration > Security > Roles or User Management in the Devolutions Server interface to find the View-only role definitionAffected if View-only role exists and is assigned to users in the environment
-
Identify password entries with custom fieldsSearch for password entries or password lists that contain custom fields, particularly nested third-level fields containing sensitive valuesAffected if Password entries with custom values exist in the vault/repository
-
Test View-only user access to password custom fieldsLog in with a View-only assigned user account and attempt to navigate to or expand password entries to view their custom field valuesAffected if View-only users can retrieve or view password list custom values (third-level nested fields) that should be restricted
-
Confirm version falls within affected rangeCompare your identified version against the affected ranges: < 2025.2.17.0 or >= 2025.3.2.0 but < 2025.3.6.0Affected if The installed version matches either range and View-only users can access password custom values
If Devolutions Server version is in the affected range (below 2025.2.17.0 or between 2025.3.2.0-2025.3.5.0) AND View-only users can retrieve password list custom values, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2025-12808.
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 · scoped2025.2.17.02025.3.6.0
Upgrade to Devolutions Server version 2025.3.6.0 or later. If immediate patching is not possible, review and restrict View-only user role permissions to prevent access to password-related entry fields.
2025.2.17.0 (for 2025.2.x branch) or 2025.3.6.0 (for 2025.3.x branch)
- Identify your current Devolutions Server version by checking the product UI or system information
- If running version 2025.2.x (2025.2.15.0 or earlier), upgrade to version 2025.2.17.0 or later
- If running version 2025.3.2.0 through 2025.3.5.0, upgrade to version 2025.3.6.0 or later
- After upgrading, verify that View-only users can no longer access third-level nested fields such as password lists custom values
- Test that proper access controls are enforced for sensitive credential data
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-12808 — 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-2025-12808 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