CVE-2025-54390
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 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the ResetPasswordRequest operation of Zimbra Collaboration (ZCS) when the zimbraFeatureResetPasswordStatus attribute is enabled. An attacker can exploit this by tricking an authenticated user into visiting a malicious webpage that silently sends a crafted SOAP request to reset the user's password. The vulnerability stems from a lack of CSRF token validation on the endpoint, allowing password resets without the user's consent.
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 confidenceThis is a CSRF vulnerability in Zimbra Collaboration's ResetPasswordRequest operation. When the zimbraFeatureResetPasswordStatus attribute is enabled, the endpoint does not validate CSRF tokens, allowing attackers to craft malicious SOAP requests that reset user passwords by tricking authenticated users into visiting specially crafted webpages.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Confirm Zimbra Collaboration installationRun 'zmcontrol -v' or check /opt/zimbra/.git describe --tags to identify the installed Zimbra version and confirm the product.Affected if Zimbra Collaboration is not installed or is a version without the ResetPasswordRequest vulnerability.
-
Check if password reset feature is enabledRun 'zmprov gs `zmhostname` zimbraFeatureResetPasswordStatus' to query the zimbraFeatureResetPasswordStatus attribute value on the Zimbra server.Affected if The attribute returns 'TRUE' or 'ENABLED', meaning the vulnerable feature is active.
-
Verify CSRF token validation for password reset endpointExamine the Zimbra configuration files in /opt/zimbra/conf/ or check the Jetty/Apache servlet configuration for the ResetPasswordRequest SOAP handler to determine if CSRF token validation is implemented.Affected if No CSRF token validation is configured or the ResetPasswordRequest handler explicitly bypasses token checks.
-
Inspect SOAP request handling logsReview Zimbra mailbox.log or security audit logs for incoming ResetPasswordRequest SOAP requests, checking if the CSRF token header is being validated or rejected.Affected if Requests are processed without CSRF token validation errors or warnings.
If zimbraFeatureResetPasswordStatus is enabled and the ResetPasswordRequest endpoint does not validate CSRF tokens, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataEnable CSRF token validation on the ResetPasswordRequest endpoint and ensure the SOAP handler verifies tokens before processing password reset requests.
- 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-2025-54390 — 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-2025-54390 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