CVE-2025-47713
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 privilege escalation vulnerability exists in Apache CloudStack versions 4.10.0.0 through 4.20.0.0 where a malicious Domain Admin user in the ROOT domain can reset the password of user-accounts of Admin role type. This operation is not appropriately restricted and allows the attacker to assume control over higher-privileged user-accounts. A malicious Domain Admin attacker can impersonate an Admin user-account and gain access to sensitive APIs and resources that could result in the compromise of resource integrity and confidentiality, data loss, denial of service, and availability of infrastructure managed by CloudStack. Users are recommended to upgrade to Apache CloudStack 4.19.3.0 or 4.20.1.0, which fixes the issue with the following: * Strict validation on Role Type hierarchy: the caller's user-account role must be equal to or higher than the target user-account's role. * API privilege comparison: the caller must possess all privileges of the user they are operating on. * Two new domain-level settings (restricted to the default Admin): - role.types.allowed.for.operations.on.accounts.of.same.role.type: Defines which role types are allowed to act on users of the same role type. Default: "Admin, DomainAdmin, ResourceAdmin". - allow.operations.on.users.in.same.account: Allows/disallows user operations within the same account. Default: true.
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 confidenceApache CloudStack versions 4.10.0.0 through 4.20.0.0 contain a privilege escalation flaw where Domain Admin users in the ROOT domain can reset passwords of higher-privileged Admin role accounts. The password reset API lacks proper role hierarchy validation, allowing a malicious Domain Admin to impersonate Admin users and access sensitive infrastructure management APIs.
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>= 4.10.0.0, < 4.19.3.0>= 4.20.0.0, < 4.20.1.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Determine CloudStack management server versionRun 'cloudstack-sysvmadm --version' or check the RPM/DEB package version (rpm -q cloudstack-management), or query the API endpoint GET /client/api?command=listVersionsAffected if Version falls within 4.10.0.0 through 4.19.3.0, or 4.20.0.0 through 4.20.1.0 (i.e., less than 4.19.3.0 or less than 4.20.1.0)
-
Identify Domain Admin users in ROOT domainUse the CloudStack API command 'listUsers' with domainid=ROOT (or the UI/CLI) and filter for users with role=DomainAdmin or type=DOMAIN_ADMINAffected if Any user account with Domain Admin role exists within the ROOT domain (domainid=ROOT)
-
Verify if password reset API accepts Domain Admin input for higher rolesAs a test (in a non-production environment), authenticate as a Domain Admin in ROOT domain and call the resetPassword API targeting an Admin user account, observing whether the API call succeeds without permission denied errorAffected if The API call returns a success response (new password or reset confirmation) rather than an authorization error, indicating the vulnerability is present
You are affected if your CloudStack version is below 4.19.3.0 or below 4.20.1.0 AND you have Domain Admin users defined in the ROOT domain who can successfully reset Admin user passwords via the API.
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 · scoped4.19.3.04.20.1.0
Upgrade to Apache CloudStack 4.19.3.0 or 4.20.1.0 which implements strict role type hierarchy validation, API privilege comparison, and configurable domain-level settings to restrict password reset operations based on caller/target role relationships.
Apache CloudStack 4.19.3.0 or 4.20.1.0
- 1. Perform a complete backup of the CloudStack database and configuration files before starting the upgrade process.
- 2. Stop all CloudStack services (management server, agents) following the standard maintenance procedure.
- 3. Upgrade the CloudStack management server to version 4.19.3.0 (for 4.x line) or 4.20.1.0 (for 4.20.x line) using the official upgrade documentation.
- 4. Run the database migration scripts included in the upgrade to apply schema changes for the new privilege validation.
- 5. Restart CloudStack services in the correct order (management server first, then agents).
- 6. Verify the upgrade by logging in as a Domain Admin and confirming that password reset operations on Admin role accounts are now properly restricted.
- 7. Test that the new role type hierarchy validation is enforced by attempting (and failing) to perform operations on higher-privileged users.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation20.0 h
- Testing14.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,768.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47713 — 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-2025-47713 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