CVE-2025-31977
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NVD · uneditedHCL BigFix SM is affected by cryptographic weakness due to weak or outdated encryption algorithms. An attacker with network access could exploit this weakness to decrypt or manipulate encrypted communications under certain conditions.
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dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceHCL BigFix SM uses weak or outdated encryption algorithms for protecting communications. An attacker with network access can exploit this cryptographic weakness to decrypt or potentially manipulate encrypted data in transit under specific conditions.
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= 23.0CVSS 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 installed HCL BigFix SM versionLocate the BigFix Service Management installation directory and check the version file or use the product's built-in version information tool (typically found in the program menu or about section)Affected if The installed version is exactly 23.0 - this version uses the weak or outdated encryption algorithms described in the CVE
-
Examine SSL/TLS protocol settingsAccess the server configuration or registry settings for the web/application server component of BigFix SM and inspect which protocol versions are enabled for inbound and outbound communicationsAffected if SSL, TLS 1.0, or TLS 1.1 protocols are enabled - these are considered weak or outdated and vulnerable to cryptographic attacks
-
Review configured cipher suitesLocate the SSL/TLS cipher configuration file (commonly in the web server config directory or the BigFix SM configuration folder) and list all enabled cipher suitesAffected if Legacy or weak cipher suites such as those using DES, 3DES, RC4, or export-grade ciphers are among the enabled cipher suites
-
Verify TLS configuration matches modern standardsCompare the current TLS configuration against industry best practices - check that only TLS 1.2 or higher is enabled and that strong cipher suites are prioritizedAffected if The configuration allows TLS versions below 1.2 or permits known-weak cipher suites, indicating the environment is vulnerable to cryptographic attacks described in this CVE
If the installed version is 23.0 AND the environment has outdated TLS protocols (below 1.2) or weak cipher suites enabled, the environment is affected by this CVE and communications may be decryptable or manipulable by network attackers.
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 dataUpdate HCL BigFix SM to a version with strong, modern encryption algorithms (e.g., TLS 1.2+, strong cipher suites) and disable deprecated or weak cryptographic protocols.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31977 — 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-2025-31977 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