CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2025-59113

CVE-2025-59113 — Bruteforce Protection Bypass in Windu CMS

Windu CMS implements weak client-side brute-force protection by using parameter loginError. Information about attempt count or timeout is not stored on the server, which allows a malicious attacker to bypass this brute-force protection by resetting this parameter. Only version 4.1 was tested and confirmed as vulnerable. This issue was fixed in version 4.1 build 2250.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, CERT-PL

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

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

jcd

windu_cms

CVSS base

6.9

MEDIUM

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

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

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)

jcd

Products (1)

windu cms

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
6.9CVSS 4.0MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-307

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

  • T1110.001Brute Force: Password Guessing
  • T1078Valid Accounts
  • T1110.003Brute Force: Password Spraying

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • jcdevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-307other pages naming this weakness

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.