CVE-2025-15642
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 · uneditedNetskope is notified about a potential gap in its Netskoped Client for Windows systems where a malicious insider with admin privileges can lead to bypassing the NSClient Tamper Protections due to weak Discretionary Access Control List (DACLs) on the service object and related registry keys,. * Product Name: Netskope Client * Affected Platform: Windows * Affected Version: All version below R138
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 confidenceThe Netskope Client for Windows contains weak Discretionary Access Control Lists (DACLs) on its service object and related registry keys. A malicious insider with administrator privileges can exploit these weak permissions to modify the NSClient service configuration or registry entries, effectively bypassing the built-in tamper protections designed to prevent modification of the security client.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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.
-
Verify Netskope Client is installedCheck for the presence of Netskope Client by looking in Program Files or querying the registry for the NSClient service using 'sc query NSClient' or reviewing installed programs.Affected if The NSClient service exists in the system services list, indicating Netskope Client is installed and the system could be vulnerable.
-
Identify the installed Netskope Client versionQuery the version information from the Netskope Client executable, typically located in the program installation directory, or retrieve it from the Windows registry under the Netskope product keys.Affected if The installed version is earlier than R138, as versions prior to R138 contain the weak DACL vulnerability.
-
Examine DACLs on the NSClient service objectUse 'sc sdshow NSClient' or a similar command to retrieve the Security Descriptor Definition Language (SDDL) of the service. Analyze the DACL entries to identify any non-administrative or overly permissive accounts granted write or full control permissions.Affected if The service DACL grants write or full control permissions to users or groups other than Administrators or SYSTEM, indicating weak permissions exist.
-
Examine DACLs on Netskope-related registry keysIdentify registry keys associated with the Netskope Client (typically under HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\NSClient or HKLM\SOFTWARE\Netskope) and inspect their permissions using 'Get-Acl' in PowerShell or regedit to view effective permissions.Affected if Registry keys related to the Netskope Client grant write or modify permissions to non-privileged users or groups, indicating weak DACLs.
A system is affected if it runs Netskope Client for Windows with a version earlier than R138 AND the NSClient service or its registry keys have overly permissive DACLs that allow modification by non-administrative users.
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 · scopedUpgrade Netskope Client to version R138 or later to obtain the vendor patch that strengthens DACLs on the service object and registry keys. Alternatively, implement additional monitoring and access controls around the Netskope service and registry objects until the upgrade can be applied.
R138
- Upgrade Netskope Client for Windows to version R138 or later to obtain the fixed DACLs on the service object and related registry keys
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-15642 — 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-2025-15642 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