CVE-2025-68721

Published Feb 5, 2026

Last updated 5 months ago

CVSS high 8.1
SSL

Overview

Description
Axigen Mail Server before 10.5.57 contains an improper access control vulnerability in the WebAdmin interface. A delegated admin account with zero permissions can bypass access control checks and gain unauthorized access to the SSL Certificates management endpoint (page=sslcerts). This allows the attacker to view, download, upload, and delete SSL certificate files, despite lacking the necessary privileges to access the Security & Filtering section.
Source
cve@mitre.org
NVD status
Modified
Products
axigen_mail_server

Risk scores

CVSS 3.1

Type
Secondary
Base score
8.1
Impact score
5.2
Exploitability score
2.8
Vector string
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Severity
HIGH

Weaknesses

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
CWE-284

Social media

Hype score
Not currently trending

  1. 🔴 CVE-2025-68721 - Critical Axigen Mail Server before 10.5.57 contains an improper access control vulnerability in the WebAdmin interface. A delegated admin account with zero permissions can bypass access control ch... https://t.co/ID6LJRFCi4 https://t.co/IB03Vdui4f

    @TheHackerWire

    5 Feb 2026

    47 Impressions

    0 Retweets

    0 Likes

    0 Bookmarks

    0 Replies

    0 Quotes

  2. CVE-2025-68721 Axigen Mail Server before 10.5.57 contains an improper access control vulnerability in the WebAdmin interface. A delegated admin account with zero permissions can byp… https://t.co/gcF6nbH438

    @CVEnew

    5 Feb 2026

    150 Impressions

    0 Retweets

    1 Like

    0 Bookmarks

    0 Replies

    0 Quotes

Configurations

Related CVEs

  1. Nexus Repository 3 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the SSL Certificate Retrieval endpoint. A user holding the nexus:ssl-truststore:read permission could cause the server to initiate outbound connections to internal or otherwise restricted network hosts. This issue affects Nexus Repository 3.0.0 through versions prior to 3.94.0.•CVE-2026-7494
  2. The Erlang/OTP ssl application does not validate that the PSK identity list and binder list carried in a TLS 1.3 ClientHello pre-shared key extension have equal length before passing them to the session ticket handler. In tls_handshake_1_3:handle_pre_shared_key/3, an OfferedPreSharedKeys record with a mismatched number of identities and binders is forwarded directly to tls_server_session_ticket:use/4, which crashes the session ticket handler process. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a single crafted ClientHello to a TLS 1.3 server with session tickets enabled (stateful or stateless mode) and permanently disrupt session ticket handling on that listener. New TLS 1.3 handshakes complete but subsequently crash when the server attempts to issue a session ticket, effectively making TLS 1.3 unusable on the affected listener until the ssl application is restarted. TLS 1.2 connections are not affected. This issue affects OTP from 22.2 before 29.0.3, 28.5.0.3 and 27.3.4.14 corresponding to ssl from 9.5 before 11.7.3, 11.6.0.3 and 11.2.12.10.•CVE-2026-55952
  3. X.509 trust-chain bypass in the OpenSSL compatibility certificate verifier (wolfSSL_X509_verify_cert()). This affects only builds with --enable-opensslextra (OPENSSL_EXTRA) and whose application validates certificates by calling X509_verify_cert() with caller-supplied untrusted intermediate certificates; for those users it is critical, otherwise the library is unaffected. In particular, native wolfSSL TLS/DTLS usage is not impacted. wolfSSL's X509_verify_cert() temporarily loads each caller-supplied untrusted intermediate into the certificate manager but failed to drop them before the trusted-store check, so an untrusted intermediate could anchor the path itself. An attacker can present a chain that never reaches a configured trust anchor and have it accepted, resulting in acceptance of an attacker-controlled certificate. This is certificate verification independent of TLS (e.g. S/MIME/CMS, code/firmware signing, JWT/JWS x5c), is not specific to any key type or algorithm, and a single untrusted intermediate suffices. The default wolfSSL TLS handshake (WOLFSSL_VERIFY_PEER) is not affected; only TLS applications doing manual or deferred peer verification through this API are, which also requires --enable-sessioncerts.•CVE-2026-11310
  4. X.509 trust-chain bypass (path-depth exhaustion) in the OpenSSL compatibility certificate verifier (wolfSSL_X509_verify_cert()). This affects only builds with --enable-opensslextra whose application calls X509_verify_cert() with caller-supplied untrusted intermediates; for those users it is critical, otherwise the library is unaffected. Native wolfSSL TLS/DTLS usage is not impacted. X509_verify_cert() returned success based only on the last verified link rather than on reaching a trust anchor: when the supplied chain is deeper than the verifier's maximum path depth (default 100), path building runs out of depth while still walking untrusted intermediates and the chain is accepted even though it never reaches a configured trust anchor, allowing acceptance of an attacker-controlled certificate. The default TLS handshake (WOLFSSL_VERIFY_PEER) is not affected; only applications doing manual or deferred verification through this API are.•CVE-2026-11999
  5. Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated Data) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages. Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD to the victim's application using these ciphers. AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD modes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated but not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte tag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only if the tag is verified succesfully. In OpenSSL's provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is computed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data. If the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without invocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received ciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its all-zeros value. When AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty ciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not know, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it's necessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without resetting the key. AES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.2. No protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support either AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must implement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the ciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.•CVE-2026-45446

References

Sources include official advisories and independent security research.