CVE-2025-49186
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 · uneditedThe product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame, making it susceptible to brute-force attacks.
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 product lacks sufficient protections against brute-force attacks by not implementing rate limiting, account lockout, or similar controls on the authentication mechanism. This allows an attacker to repeatedly attempt different credentials until they successfully authenticate.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify authentication brute-force protection existsReview the authentication configuration or documentation to confirm whether rate limiting, account lockout, or similar brute-force protection mechanisms are implemented on the login/authentication endpointsAffected if No rate limiting, account lockout, CAPTCHA, or similar brute-force protection mechanisms are found on authentication endpoints
-
Check authentication logs for brute-force detectionExamine authentication and access logs for signs of repeated failed login attempts - look for patterns of multiple authentication failures from the same source within a short timeframeAffected if Logs show repeated failed login attempts from the same source without any blocking or throttling occurring
-
Inspect web server or application firewall configurationReview the web server (e.g., Apache, Nginx), application firewall, or load balancer configuration to determine if any rate limiting or request throttling rules are applied to authentication endpointsAffected if No rate limiting or request throttling rules are configured for authentication URLs or endpoints
-
Review account lockout policy settingsCheck the user management or authentication system settings for account lockout policies - look for parameters controlling maximum failed attempts before account lockout, lockout duration, or similar settingsAffected if No account lockout policy is configured or the system allows unlimited failed authentication attempts without consequence
The environment is affected if the authentication mechanism lacks rate limiting, account lockout, CAPTCHA, or any other mechanism to prevent or slow down brute-force credential attacks.
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 on authentication endpoints, combined with account lockout policies after a configurable number of failed attempts, and consider adding CAPTCHA for repeated failures.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49186 — 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-2025-49186 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