“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.
Score 9.4 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2026-11-02. A secondary CVSS source baseline 9.4; sources differ by 0.0.
Also known asEUVD-2025-211233 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-p4rq-q6fh-965p (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.
The CVE record's CNA (WSO2 LLC) lists WSO2 API Manager versions 3.1.0 up to but not including 3.1.0.347, 3.2.0 up to but not including 3.2.0.450, 3.2.1 up to but not including 3.2.1.70, 4.0.0 up to but not including 4.0.0.370 and 5 more ranges; WSO2 Identity Server as Key Manager versions 5.10.0 up to but not including 5.10.0.367; WSO2 Open Banking AM versions 2.0.0 up to but not including 2.0.0.396 as affected, and 5 more products. No release containing a fix is confirmed on record.
The System REST APIs do not correctly enforce access control mechanisms, allowing users with lower privilege roles to execute administrative actions that should be restricted. This weakness permits unauthorized operations on the affected product.
Successful exploitation could enable a malicious actor to perform unauthorized administrative operations, including executing administrative functions. APIs exposed through the WSO2 API Manager's API Gateway are not affected by this vulnerability.
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.4): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.4 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
No fix is confirmed yet. Check the vendor's advisory for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation on your normal schedule at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)3 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
November 2, 2026
November 2, 2026
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2025-11969
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.