CVE-2025-21626
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 · uneditedGLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. Starting in version 0.71 and prior to version 10.0.18, an anonymous user can fetch sensitive information from the `status.php` endpoint. Version 10.0.18 contains a fix for the issue. Some workarounds are available. One may delete the `status.php` file, restrict its access, or remove any sensitive values from the `name` field of the active LDAP directories, mail servers authentication providers and mail receivers.
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 confidenceGLPI asset management software prior to version 10.0.18 contains an information disclosure vulnerability where the status.php endpoint exposes sensitive configuration details including names of LDAP directories, mail server authentication providers, and mail receivers to anonymous (unauthenticated) users.
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>= 0.71, < 10.0.18CVSS 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 GLPI installation location and versionLocate the GLPI web root directory. Check the version.php file (typically at VERSION or src/Version.php) or the changelog file to determine the installed GLPI version number.Affected if The installed version is less than 10.0.18 (versions 0.71 through 10.0.17 are affected).
-
Verify status.php endpoint existsCheck if the file status.php exists in the GLPI web root directory (e.g., /glpi/status.php or /status.php within the GLPI installation).Affected if The status.php file exists in the web-accessible directory.
-
Test unauthenticated access to status.phpUsing curl, wget, or a browser, make an HTTP request to the status.php endpoint without providing any authentication credentials (e.g., curl -s https://yourserver/glpi/status.php).Affected if The endpoint returns an HTTP 200 response without requiring login, indicating it is accessible to anonymous users.
-
Inspect response for sensitive configuration namesExamine the response body from the unauthenticated status.php request. Look for strings that may reveal names of LDAP directories, mail server authentication providers, or mail receivers.Affected if The response contains any configuration names (such as LDAP directory names, mail server provider names, or mail receiver names) that should be restricted from public view.
You are affected if GLPI version is 0.71 or higher but below 10.0.18 AND the status.php endpoint is accessible without authentication and returns sensitive configuration details.
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 · scoped10.0.18
Upgrade to GLPI version 10.0.18 or implement workarounds by deleting/restricting access to status.php or removing sensitive values from the name fields of LDAP directories, mail servers, and mail receivers.
10.0.18
- 1. Back up the current GLPI installation and database before upgrading.
- 2. Download GLPI version 10.0.18 from the official GLPI repository or website.
- 3. Extract the new version files, ensuring to preserve the config directory (usually at glpi/config) and the files directory (at glpi/files).
- 4. Replace the existing GLPI files with the new version files, keeping the config and files directories intact.
- 5. Run the upgrade process by accessing the GLPI installation URL, which should automatically trigger the database upgrade.
- 6. Verify the installation by logging in and checking that the status.php endpoint no longer exposes sensitive information.
- 7. Test core functionality to ensure the upgrade did not break existing features.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-21626 — 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-2025-21626 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