CVE-2025-4319
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 · uneditedImproper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts, Weak Password Recovery Mechanism for Forgotten Password vulnerability in Birebirsoft Software and Technology Solutions Sufirmam allows Brute Force, Password Recovery Exploitation. This issue affects Sufirmam: through 23012026. NOTE: The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceThe Sufirmam application suffers from improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts and a weak password recovery mechanism. Attackers can conduct brute force attacks against the login function without any rate limiting or account lockout protections. Additionally, the password recovery process has insufficient validation, allowing attackers to exploit the recovery mechanism to reset or discover user passwords.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:H
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.
-
Confirm Sufirmam application presenceIdentify if the target web application is Sufirmam by checking application banners, headers, or login page content for 'Sufirmam' branding or identifiersAffected if The application is confirmed to be Sufirmam and has a login interface
-
Test login endpoint for rate limitingSend multiple consecutive failed authentication requests (e.g., 10-20 attempts) to the login endpoint using a script or manual testing tool, observing whether any rate limiting responses (e.g., HTTP 429, temporary blocks) are returnedAffected if No rate limiting is enforced and the application accepts all requests without throttling or blocking
-
Verify account lockout policyAfter multiple failed login attempts, verify whether the targeted account becomes locked, disabled, or requires manual administrator intervention to regain accessAffected if No account lockout or temporary account suspension occurs after repeated failed attempts
-
Examine password recovery mechanismInitiate a password recovery flow and observe whether the system requires secure verification (e.g., token-based links, email confirmation, MFA) or allows trivial validation (e.g., security question alone, direct password reset without verification)Affected if Password recovery allows reset or provides user hints without sufficient verification steps or multi-factor validation
A user is affected if Sufirmam is running and lacks rate limiting on login, has no account lockout protection, and uses a weak password recovery process without proper token or multi-factor verification.
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 dataImplement rate limiting, temporary account lockouts, and CAPTCHA on login and password recovery endpoints. Strengthen password recovery with secure token-based verification, email confirmation, and multi-factor authentication. Consider web application firewall (WAF) deployment as an interim control.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-4319 — 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-2025-4319 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