CVE-2025-4660
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 · uneditedA remote code execution vulnerability exists in the Windows agent component of SecureConnector due to improper access controls on a named pipe. The pipe is accessible to the Everyone group and does not restrict remote connections, allowing any network-based attacker to connect without authentication. By interacting with this pipe, an attacker can redirect the agent to communicate with a rogue server that can issue commands via the SecureConnector Agent. This does not impact Linux or OSX Secure Connector.
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 confidenceA remote code execution vulnerability exists in the Windows SecureConnector agent due to improper access controls on a named pipe. The pipe is exposed to the Everyone group and allows unrestricted remote connections, enabling any unauthenticated network attacker to connect and redirect the agent to a malicious server for command execution.
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>= 11.1.02.1019, < 11.3.7CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Identify installed Forescout SecureConnector versionOpen Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features, or run 'Get-ItemProperty HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\* | Select-Object DisplayName, DisplayVersion' in PowerShell to find the installed version of Forescout SecureConnectorAffected if The installed version is >= 11.1.02.1019 AND < 11.3.7
-
Locate the SecureConnector named pipeUse a tool like PipeList from Sysinternals or run 'Get-Process | Where-Object {$_.ProcessName -like "*SecureConnector*"}' to identify the SecureConnector process, then use Process Monitor or inspect the process handles to find the named pipe it createsAffected if The named pipe exists and is accessible to the Everyone group
-
Verify named pipe security permissionsUse the Windows Security event logs or a tool like accesschk.exe to examine the DACL on the SecureConnector named pipe, checking if the Everyone group or anonymous logon has allowed access permissionsAffected if The Everyone group or unauthenticated users have connect permissions to the pipe
-
Check for anomalous network connectionsUse netstat -ano or Windows Firewall logs to identify outgoing connections from the SecureConnector process to unexpected or suspicious remote serversAffected if The SecureConnector agent is connecting to unrecognized or rogue server addresses
A system is affected if Forescout SecureConnector version falls within 11.1.02.1019 through 11.3.6 AND the named pipe grants broad access to unauthenticated users.
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.
dbcve · scoped11.3.7
Restrict named pipe access by removing the Everyone group and implementing proper authentication/authorization; also block or restrict remote connections to the pipe to prevent network-based exploitation.
SecureConnector 11.3.7 or later
- Identify all Windows SecureConnector installations in the environment using asset discovery tools or inventory databases
- Check the current version of each SecureConnector installation (look for versions >= 11.1.02.1019 and < 11.3.7)
- Access the vendor portal at forescout.my.site.com to download the SecureConnector version 11.3.7 or later
- In a non-production test environment, upgrade one or more test systems to validate compatibility and confirm the named pipe permissions issue is resolved
- Schedule a maintenance window for production systems
- Deploy the upgrade to production Windows SecureConnector agents, either via automated push or manual installation
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the SecureConnector version on affected systems
- Confirm the named pipe access controls have been properly restricted (the pipe should no longer be accessible to the Everyone group)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-4660 — 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-2025-4660 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