Credentials BindingApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2025-53650
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 · uneditedJenkins Credentials Binding Plugin 687.v619cb_15e923f and earlier does not properly mask (i.e., replace with asterisks) credentials present in exception error messages that are written to the build log.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins Credentials Binding Plugin versions 687.v619cb_15e923f and earlier fails to properly mask (replace with asterisks) credentials that appear in exception error messages, causing sensitive credential values to be exposed in plain text within build logs.
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
Credentials BindingApplication
<= 687.689.v1a_f775332fcCVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 Credentials Binding Plugin versionNavigate to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'Credentials Binding', or use the Jenkins CLI: java -jar jenkins-cli.jar list-plugins | grep credentials-bindingAffected if The installed version is 687.v619cb_15e923f or earlier, or falls within 687.689.v1a_f775332fc and earlier
-
Review recent build console output for exposed credentialsOpen recent build pages (especially failed or errored builds), view the Console Output, and search for any plain-text strings that match known credential values or follow patterns of API keys, tokens, or passwords that should have been maskedAffected if Any sensitive credential values appear in plain text rather than masked as asterisks in build logs
-
Search historical build logs for credential patternsIn the build records directory (typically $JENKINS_HOME/jobs/<job-name>/builds/<number>/log or console.txt), search for known secret values or use regex patterns matching your credential naming conventions to identify any exposed secretsAffected if Plain-text credentials are found in historical build logs from any build where the Credentials Binding plugin was used to inject secrets
You are affected if the Credentials Binding Plugin version is 687.689.v1a_f775332fc or earlier and plain-text credentials appear in build logs where asterisks should appear instead.
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 dataUpdate the Jenkins Credentials Binding Plugin to the latest version beyond 687.v619cb_15e923f, and audit historical build logs for any exposed credentials that may need to be purged or redacted.
Fix this in Credentials Binding
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-53650 — 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-2025-53650 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