CVE-2025-1331
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 CICS TX Standard 11.1 and IBM CICS TX Advanced 10.1 and 11.1 could allow a local user to execute arbitrary code on the system due to the use of unsafe use of the gets function.
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 confidenceIBM CICS TX Standard 11.1 and IBM CICS TX Advanced 10.1/11.1 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability stemming from unsafe use of the deprecated gets() function, which does not perform bounds checking on input. A local authenticated attacker could exploit this to achieve arbitrary code execution with elevated privileges.
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= 11.1.0.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify if IBM CICS TX is installedLocate the IBM CICS TX installation directory, typically under the IBM or CICS subdirectory in Program Files, or check for the product via system inventory toolsAffected if IBM CICS TX Standard or Advanced is present on the system
-
Determine the installed versionRun the product's version command or check the version information in the installation directory, registry, or product-specific configuration fileAffected if The installed version matches 11.1.0.0 for Standard, or 10.1.x or 11.1.x for Advanced
-
Confirm the product editionIdentify whether the installation is IBM CICS TX Standard 11.1 or IBM CICS TX Advanced 10.1/11.1 by checking product licensing or edition-specific filesAffected if The edition is Standard 11.1 or Advanced 10.1 or 11.1
-
Verify local access controlsReview system permissions and user access controls to determine if untrusted or unauthorized local users have authenticated access to the CICS TX environmentAffected if Untrusted local authenticated users have access to the system where CICS TX is running
You are affected if IBM CICS TX Standard 11.1.0.0 or IBM CICS TX Advanced 10.1.x/11.1.x is installed and untrusted local users can authenticate to the system.
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 dataApply IBM's security patches for the affected versions. As a defense-in-depth measure, restrict local system access to trusted, authorized users only.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-1331 — 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-2025-1331 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