CVE-2025-27028
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 · uneditedThe Linux deprivileged user vpuser in Radiflow iSAP Smart Collector (CentOS 7 - VSAP 1.20) can read the entire file system content, including files belonging to other users and having restricted access (like, for example, the root password hash).
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 Linux deprivileged user 'vpuser' in Radiflow iSAP Smart Collector (CentOS 7, VSAP 1.20) has excessive file system read permissions, allowing unauthorized access to sensitive files including other users' files and restricted system files like the root password hash.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/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.
-
Verify vpuser account existsRun 'id vpuser' or 'grep ^vpuser /etc/passwd' to confirm the vpuser account is present on the systemAffected if vpuser account exists on the system (this is the prerequisite for being vulnerable)
-
Check Radiflow iSAP Smart Collector versionRun 'rpm -q vsap' or look for version files in /opt/radiflow or /opt/vsap directories. Compare the installed version to VSAP 1.20Affected if Installed VSAP version is 1.20 or falls within the affected version range (if additional ranges were provided)
-
Test vpuser access to /etc/shadowAs the vpuser (using 'su - vpuser' or 'sudo -u vpuser'), attempt to read the shadow file with 'cat /etc/shadow'Affected if vpuser can successfully read /etc/shadow and view password hashes (indicates excessive permissions)
-
Verify vpuser can access other users home directoriesAs vpuser, attempt to list and read files in other users home directories (e.g., 'ls /home/otheruser', 'cat /home/otheruser/.bashrc')Affected if vpuser can read files in other users home directories without proper authorization
-
Check sensitive file permissions accessible by vpuserAs vpuser, attempt to access configuration files with credentials, SSH keys, or other sensitive data in system directoriesAffected if vpuser can read files containing credentials, API keys, or other sensitive configuration data
If the vpuser account exists and can read /etc/shadow or access other restricted files, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 dataRestrict vpuser account file system access to only necessary directories using appropriate file permissions and access controls; ensure sensitive files (especially /etc/shadow and configuration files with credentials) are not readable by this deprivileged user account.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-27028 — 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-2025-27028 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