GHSA-vwcg-c828-9822 CVE-2026-25893
FUXA Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution via Admin JWT Minting
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Critical · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.77%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 55.63% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Fix
1.2.10- Upgrade fuxa-server to this version or later
Description
Note
GitHub incorrectly stated this vulnerability is identical to CVE-2025-69970, which describes the fact that authentication is disabled by default. This advisory describes an exploit chain that enables authentication bypass via the heartbeat refresh endpoint when authentication is enabled. This misleads users into thinking that enabling authentication would mitigate this vulnerability. Please see the patch for more information: https://github.com/frangoteam/FUXA/commit/fe82348d160904d0013b9a3e267d50158f5c7afb.
Description
An authentication bypass vulnerability in FUXA allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to gain administrative access via the heartbeat refresh API and execute arbitrary code on the server. This affects FUXA through version 1.2.9 when authentication is enabled. This issue has been patched in FUXA version 1.2.10.
Impact
Affected deployments are those with runtime.settings.secureEnabled set to true.
Exploitation allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass all authentication mechanisms and obtain administrative access to the FUXA instance by minting administrator JWTs via the heartbeat refresh endpoint. With these elevated privileges, the attacker can interact with administrative APIs, including intended features designed for automation and scripting, to execute arbitrary code in the context of the FUXA service. Depending on deployment configuration and permissions, this may lead to full system compromise and could further expose connected ICS/SCADA environments to follow-on actions.
Patches
This issue has been patched in FUXA version 1.2.10. Users are strongly encouraged to update to the latest available release.
Affected versions
npm
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| fuxa-server | < 1.2.10 |
1.2.10 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
fuxa-server npm → 1.2.10
- npm
npm install fuxa-server@1.2.10- yarn
yarn add fuxa-server@1.2.10- pnpm
pnpm add fuxa-server@1.2.10
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- High
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- High
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- High
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- High
CVSS 3.1 9.8
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Weakness
CWE-285: Improper Authorization
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
CWE-287: Improper Authentication
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-8ghr-w65f-j3qr FUXA's scheduler API missing admin check enables operator-to-admin escalation via scheduled device actions | Medium | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-h9fj-c2qr-76g2 FUXA has SQL Injection in its TDengine DAQ connector via backslash bypass of escapeTdString | Medium | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-w86f-rf9w-h3x6 FUXA: Unauthenticated SSRF via Socket.IO DEVICE_WEBAPI_REQUEST and DEVICE_PROPERTY with response reading | High | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-r9g5-7q8j-958c FUXA provides guest and invalid-token access to protected read APIs in secure mode | Medium | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-q3w6-q3hc-c5x6 FUXA's Unauthenticated Project Data Disclosure Exposes Server-Side Scripts and Device Configurations | High | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-rg3m-cfq7-g6h6 FUXA Vulnerable to Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution via Script Test Mode Authorization Bypass | High | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-fwcm-rqvw-j3p7 FUXA has an unauthenticated arbitrary tag value disclosure via /api/getTagValue | High | Also affects fuxa-server |
| GHSA-68m5-5w2h-h837 FUXA Affected by a Path Traversal Sanitization Bypass | High | Also affects fuxa-server |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor