CVE-2025-65998
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 · uneditedApache Syncope can be configured to store the user password values in the internal database with AES encryption, though this is not the default option. When AES is configured, the default key value, hard-coded in the source code, is always used. This allows a malicious attacker, once obtained access to the internal database content, to reconstruct the original cleartext password values. This is not affecting encrypted plain attributes, whose values are also stored using AES encryption. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 3.0.15 / 4.0.3, which fix this issue.
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 Syncope uses a hard-coded AES encryption key for storing user passwords in its internal database. An attacker who gains access to the database can decrypt all password values using this known default key, exposing user credentials.
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>= 2.1.0, <= 2.1.14>= 3.0.0, < 3.0.15>= 4.0.0, < 4.0.3CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Identify Apache Syncope installationLocate the Syncope installation directory or running process. Common paths include /opt/syncope, /var/lib/syncope, or check for java processes running org.apache.syncope.Affected if Apache Syncope is not installed or not running
-
Determine the installed versionCheck the Syncope version from the WAR file, pom.xml, version.properties, or the admin console. Compare against affected ranges: 2.1.0-2.1.14, 3.0.0-3.0.14, or 4.0.0-4.0.2.Affected if The installed version falls within any of the affected ranges listed
-
Confirm internal storage is in useDetermine if Syncope is using its internal database (embedded or external) to store user credentials. Check the configuration for JDBC or internal storage settings in syncope.properties or the deployment configuration.Affected if Internal database storage is used for password credentials
-
Verify default encryption key is presentSearch configuration files for the AES encryption key property. Look in syncope.properties, security.groovy, or similar configuration for a hard-coded AES key value used for password encryption.Affected if A default or hard-coded AES key is configured for password encryption
You are affected if you are running any version within 2.1.0-2.1.14, 3.0.0-3.0.14, or 4.0.0-4.0.2 AND using Syncope's internal database to store passwords with the default hard-coded encryption key.
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 · scoped3.0.154.0.3
Upgrade to Apache Syncope 3.0.15 or 4.0.3 which fixes this issue by removing the hard-coded key.
3.0.15 (for 3.0.x branches) or 4.0.3 (for 4.0.x branches)
- 1. Back up your Apache Syncope database before proceeding with any upgrade.
- 2. Identify your current Syncope version by checking the deployed WAR file or pom.xml dependencies.
- 3. If running version 2.1.x: upgrade to the latest 2.1.x release (if available) then migrate to version 3.0.15 or 4.0.3.
- 4. If running version 3.0.x: upgrade to version 3.0.15.
- 5. If running version 4.0.x: upgrade to version 4.0.3.
- 6. Deploy the upgraded WAR file to your application server.
- 7. Verify the application starts successfully and all services are operational.
- 8. Test user authentication to confirm passwords still function after the upgrade.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-65998 — 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-2025-65998 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