CVE-2025-8049
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 · uneditedInsufficient Granularity of Access Control vulnerability in opentext Flipper allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. The vulnerability could allow a low-privilege user to elevate privileges within the application. This issue affects Flipper: 3.1.2.
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 confidenceOpentext Flipper 3.1.2 contains an Insufficient Granularity of Access Control vulnerability allowing low-privilege users to elevate their privileges within the application. The issue stems from incorrectly configured access control security levels that fail to properly enforce role-based permissions, enabling privilege escalation.
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= 3.1.2CVSS 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.
-
Identify Opentext Flipper installation versionLocate the Flipper application and check its version number, typically found in the application metadata, about page, or installation directoryAffected if The installed version is exactly 3.1.2
-
Confirm RBAC is enabledAccess the application's administrative or security settings and verify whether role-based access control (RBAC) is configured and activeAffected if RBAC is enabled and the application uses role-based permissions
-
Check for multiple user rolesExamine the user management interface to determine if different privilege levels (such as admin, editor, viewer) are defined in the systemAffected if Multiple roles with different privilege levels exist in the application
-
Verify role privilege boundariesLog in as a low-privilege user (e.g., basic user or viewer) and attempt to access or execute functions designated for higher-privileged roles (e.g., administrative actions, user management, configuration changes)Affected if Low-privilege users can perform actions reserved for higher-privileged roles, indicating broken privilege boundaries
You are affected if Opentext Flipper version 3.1.2 is running with RBAC enabled and low-privilege users can access higher-privileged functions due to insufficient access control granularity.
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 dataReview and correct the access control security level configurations to enforce proper role-based permissions. Implement fine-grained access controls that restrict privileged operations to authorized roles only.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-8049 — 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-2025-8049 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