Aspera FaspexApplication · Ibm

CVE-2025-36227

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-10
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 5.0.15 or later.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable

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 · unedited
IBM Aspera Faspex 5 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.3 is vulnerable to HTTP header injection, caused by improper validation of input by the HOST headers.  This could allow an attacker to conduct various attacks against the vulnerable system, including cross-site scripting, cache poisoning or session hijacking.

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 confidence

IBM Aspera Faspex 5 versions 5.0.0-5.0.14.3 fails to properly validate or sanitize the Host HTTP header input. Attackers can inject arbitrary headers or poison responses by supplying crafted Host header values, leading to cross-site scripting, cache poisoning, or session hijacking.

MitigationUpgrade to IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.14.4 or later. Until then, consider implementing Web Application Firewall rules to validate Host headers and disable support for user-supplied Host headers where possible.

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
Aspera FaspexApplication
Affected:>= 5.0.0, < 5.0.15

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
Low
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine installed Faspex version
    Access the IBM Aspera Faspex admin interface and navigate to the About or System Information section to view the software version. Alternatively, check the installation directory for a version file or use the faspex --version command if available via CLI.
    Affected if The displayed version is 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.3 (any version before 5.0.15).
  2. Verify Faspex web service is running
    Check if the IBM Aspera Faspex web application is accessible by attempting to reach the login page or API endpoint over HTTP/HTTPS.
    Affected if The web interface is accessible and responds to requests, indicating the application is exposed to network traffic.
  3. Confirm Host header handling is enabled
    Send a test HTTP request to the Faspex server with a custom Host header (for example, Host: evil.example.com) and observe whether the application accepts and reflects this header in its response.
    Affected if The application accepts arbitrary Host header values and reflects them in responses, cache entries, or location headers without validation.

You are affected if the installed IBM Aspera Faspex version is 5.0.0 through 5.0.14.3 and the web interface is accessible over the network.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 5.0.15 or later
Fixed in 5.0.15
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.14.4 or later. Until then, consider implementing Web Application Firewall rules to validate Host headers and disable support for user-supplied Host headers where possible.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Aspera Faspex 5.0.15

  1. 1. Review IBM Aspera Faspex release notes for version 5.0.15 to understand changes and any prerequisites
  2. 2. Schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
  3. 3. Back up the current Faspex configuration and data
  4. 4. Upgrade Aspera Faspex to version 5.0.15 or later
  5. 5. Verify the HTTP header injection vulnerability is resolved by testing HOST header handling
  6. 6. Confirm normal application functionality after upgrade
Caveat Review release notes for any configuration or behavioral changes between your current version and 5.0.15

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Aspera Faspex Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-36227 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-36227 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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