CVE-2025-8974
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 vulnerability was determined in linlinjava litemall up to 1.8.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file litemall-wx-api/src/main/java/org/linlinjava/litemall/wx/util/JwtHelper.java of the component JSON Web Token Handler. The manipulation of the argument SECRET with the input X-Litemall-Token leads to hard-coded credentials. The attack may be launched remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 litemall application up to version 1.8.0 contains hard-coded JWT (JSON Web Token) credentials in the JwtHelper.java file. The SECRET value used to sign and verify tokens is hardcoded rather than being configurable, allowing attackers who discover the secret to forge valid JWT tokens by crafting requests with the X-Litemall-Token header.
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<= 1.8.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Locate the JwtHelper.java fileSearch the litemall-wx-api source code for the JwtHelper.java file, typically found in the source directory under litemall-wx-api moduleAffected if The file exists and contains JWT token validation logic
-
Inspect JwtHelper.java for hardcoded secretOpen JwtHelper.java and search for hardcoded string literals used as JWT secret - look for strings assigned to variables named SECRET, secret, jwtSecret, or similar near JWT parsing/validation codeAffected if A static, hardcoded string is used for JWT signature validation rather than a dynamic value from environment or config
-
Verify the litemall-wx-api versionCheck the project version in pom.xml or build configuration file for litemall-wx-api module, or check the deployed artifact versionAffected if The installed version is 1.8.0 or lower
-
Confirm X-Litemall-Token authentication is in useReview API endpoint configurations and filters that process the X-Litemall-Token header for authentication purposesAffected if The application uses the X-Litemall-Token header with JWT validation for protected endpoints
A user is affected if their Linlinjava Litemall deployment uses litemall-wx-api version 1.8.0 or lower and the JwtHelper.java contains a hardcoded JWT secret that could be used to forge tokens.
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 dataReplace the hard-coded JWT SECRET in JwtHelper.java with a dynamically loaded secret from environment variables or a secure secrets management system, then invalidate all existing tokens and require re-authentication.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-8974 — 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-2025-8974 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