CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
CRITICAL

CVE-2025-34153

CVE-2025-34153 — Hyland OnBase < 17.0.2.87 .NET Remoting TCP Channel Unauthenticated RCE

Hyland OnBase versions prior to 17.0.2.87 (other versions may be affected) are vulnerable to unauthenticated remote code execution via insecure deserialization on the .NET Remoting TCP channel. The service registers a listener on port 6031 with the URI endpoint TimerServer, implemented in Hyland.Core.Timers.dll. This endpoint deserializes untrusted input using the .NET BinaryFormatter, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code under the context of NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, VulnCheck

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

1%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

hyland software

onbase

CVSS base

10

CRITICAL

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

Products (1)

onbase

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
10CVSS 4.0CRITICALcvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-502

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.