CVE-2025-26654
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 · uneditedSAP Commerce Cloud (Public Cloud) does not allow to disable unencrypted HTTP (port 80) entirely, but instead allows a redirect from port 80 to 443 (HTTPS). As a result, Commerce normally communicates securely over HTTPS. However, the confidentiality and integrity of data sent on the first request before the redirect may be impacted if the client is configured to use HTTP and sends confidential data on the first request before the redirect.
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 confidenceSAP Commerce Cloud (Public Cloud) does not allow fully disabling HTTP port 80, only redirecting to HTTPS. When clients are configured to use HTTP and send confidential data on the initial request before the redirect occurs, that data is transmitted unencrypted, compromising confidentiality and integrity.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Verify HTTP port 80 accessibilityCheck if your SAP Commerce Cloud environment exposes HTTP port 80 by attempting to connect to the application over HTTP (e.g., curl -I http://<your-domain>/). Also review any load balancer, reverse proxy, or firewall rules for port 80 access.Affected if Port 80 responds or is reachable, indicating HTTP is enabled
-
Review client connection configurationsAudit all client configurations, mobile apps, and scripts that connect to SAP Commerce Cloud. Check for any settings specifying HTTP URLs (http://) rather than HTTPS (https://).Affected if Any client is configured to use HTTP protocol for initial connections
-
Examine integration endpoint settingsReview all integration configurations (SOAP, REST, middleware, third-party connectors) for SAP Commerce Cloud. Look for endpoints configured over HTTP.Affected if Any integration endpoint is set to communicate over HTTP rather than HTTPS
-
Test redirect behavior with sensitive data simulationSend a test request with a query parameter or header over HTTP (not HTTPS) to observe whether the server accepts it before redirecting to HTTPS. Use a tool like curl to monitor the full request/response flow.Affected if The server accepts and processes the HTTP request before issuing a redirect, or accepts data on port 80 at all
If HTTP port 80 is accessible and any client or integration can initiate connections over HTTP, sensitive data transmitted before the redirect occurs is vulnerable to interception.
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 dataEnsure all clients and integration endpoints are configured to use HTTPS exclusively; advise users not to send sensitive data on HTTP before redirects occur. Await SAP platform update to support disabling HTTP entirely.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-26654 — 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-2025-26654 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