Webex MeetingsApplication · Cisco
CVE-2025-20291
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 in Cisco Webex Meetings could have allowed an unauthenticated, remote attacker to redirect a targeted Webex Meetings user to an untrusted website. Cisco has addressed this vulnerability in the Cisco Webex Meetings service, and no customer action is needed. This vulnerability existed because of insufficient validation of URLs that were included in a meeting-join URL. Prior to this vulnerability being addressed, an attacker could have exploited this vulnerability by including a URL to a website of their choosing in a specific value of a Cisco Webex Meetings join URL. A successful exploit could have allowed the attacker to redirect a targeted user to a website that was controlled by the attacker, possibly making the user more likely to believe the website was trusted by Webex and perform additional actions as part of phishing attacks.
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 confidenceOpen redirect vulnerability in Cisco Webex Meetings where insufficient validation of URLs in meeting-join URLs allowed an unauthenticated attacker to include a malicious URL in a specific parameter value, redirecting users to attacker-controlled websites for phishing attacks.
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
Webex MeetingsApplication
all versionsCVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Confirm Cisco Webex Meetings usageReview your organization's software inventory or application logs to determine if Cisco Webex Meetings is actively used. Check for webex meeting domains in browser history, SSO configurations, or calendar integrations.Affected if Cisco Webex Meetings is deployed and users join meetings via meeting-join URLs
-
Inspect meeting-join URL parametersCapture or review a sample Webex meeting-join URL (typically containing a parameter that specifies the meeting destination). Look for URL parameters that control redirection, such as a destination or redirect parameter.Affected if The meeting-join URL contains a parameter accepting arbitrary URL values without validation
-
Test for open redirect behaviorModify a meeting-join URL by appending a test redirect parameter value pointing to an external domain (for example, adding a destination parameter set to an unrelated domain). Observe whether the application permits the redirect.Affected if The application allows redirecting to an arbitrary external domain from the meeting-join URL
-
Review integration logs for suspicious redirectsCheck proxy, firewall, or web application logs for Webex meeting-join requests that show redirect destinations to unfamiliar or attacker-controlled domains.Affected if Logs show meeting-join URLs redirecting users to domains unrelated to Cisco or your organization
Users are likely NOT affected because Cisco has already addressed this vulnerability server-side; detection is only needed to verify no custom integrations bypass the fix.
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 · scopedNo customer action required—Cisco has already addressed this vulnerability server-side in the Cisco Webex Meetings service.
- Cisco has already addressed this vulnerability in the Cisco Webex Meetings service.
- No customer action is needed as the fix was applied server-side by Cisco.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Webex Meetings
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20291 — 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-2025-20291 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