Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.31% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-61778High confidence
Akka.Remote TLS did not properly implement certificate-based authentication
akkadotnet · akka.net
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-JHPV-4Q4F-43G5 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
9.3CriticalCVSS 4.0
Within 72 hours
Fix not verifiedCritical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs akkadotnet akka.net and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges4 source-attributed ranges
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NuGetAkka.Cluster | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 1.2.0; fixed 1.5.52 | 1.5.52 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 7 Oct 2025 |
| NuGetAkka.Remote | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 1.2.0; fixed 1.5.52 | 1.5.52 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 7 Oct 2025 |
| nugetAkka.Cluster | >= 1.2.0, < 1.5.52 | 1.5.52 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 7 Oct 2025 |
| nugetAkka.Remote | >= 1.2.0, < 1.5.52 | 1.5.52 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 7 Oct 2025 |
Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
Akka.NET is a .NET port of the Akka project from the Scala / Java community. In all versions of Akka.Remote from v1.2.0 to v1.5.51, TLS could be enabled via our `akka.remote.dot-netty.tcp` transport and this would correctly enforce private key validation on the server-side of inbound connections. Akka.Remote, however, never asked the outbound-connecting client to present ITS certificate - therefore it's possible for untrusted parties to connect to a private key'd Akka.NET cluster and begin communicating with it without any certificate. The issue here is that for certificate-based authentication to work properly, ensuring that all members of the Akka.Remote network are secured with the same private key, Akka.Remote needed to implement mutual TLS. This was not the case before Akka.NET v1.5.52. Those who run Akka.NET inside a private network that they fully control or who were never using TLS in the first place are now affected by the bug. However, those who use TLS to secure their networks must upgrade to Akka.NET V1.5.52 or later. One patch forces "fail fast" semantics if TLS is enabled but the private key is missing or invalid. Previous versions would only check that once connection attempts occurred. The second patch, a critical fix, enforces mutual TLS (mTLS) by default, so both parties must be keyed using the same certificate. As a workaround, avoid exposing the application publicly to avoid the vulnerability having a practical impact on one's application. However, upgrading to version 1.5.52 is still recommended by the maintainers.
What
Akka.NET is a .NET port of the Akka project from the Scala / Java community. In all versions of Akka.Remote from v1.2.0 to v1.5.51, TLS could be enabled via our `akka.remote.dot-netty.tcp` transport and this would correctly enforce private key validation on the server-side of inbound connections. Akka.Remote, however, never asked the outbound-connecting client to present ITS certificate - therefore it's possible for untrusted parties to connect to a private key'd Akka.NET cluster and begin communicating with it without any certificate. The issue here is that for certificate-based authentication to work properly, ensuring that all members of the Akka.Remote network are secured with the same private key, Akka.Remote needed to implement mutual TLS. This was not the case before Akka.NET v1.5.52. Those who run Akka.NET inside a private network that they fully control or who were never using TLS in the first place are now affected by the bug. However, those who use TLS to secure their networks must upgrade to Akka.NET V1.5.52 or later. One patch forces "fail fast" semantics if TLS is enabled but the private key is missing or invalid. Previous versions would only check that once connection attempts occurred. The second patch, a critical fix, enforces mutual TLS (mTLS) by default, so both parties must be keyed using the same certificate. As a workaround, avoid exposing the application publicly to avoid the vulnerability having a practical impact on one's application. However, upgrading to version 1.5.52 is still recommended by the maintainers.
Why
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Akka.NET is a .NET port of the Akka project from the Scala / Java community. In all versions of Akka.Remote from v1.2.0 to v1.5.51, TLS could be enabled via our `akka.remote.dot-netty.tcp` transport and this would correctly enforce private key validation on the server-side of inbound connections. Akka.Remote, however, never asked the outbound-connecting client to present ITS certificate - therefore it's possible for untrusted parties to connect to a private key'd Akka.NET cluster and begin communicating with it without any certificate. The issue here is that for certificate-based authentication to work properly, ensuring that all members of the Akka.Remote network are secured with the same private key, Akka.Remote needed to implement mutual TLS. This was not the case before Akka.NET v1.5.52. Those who run Akka.NET inside a private network that they fully control or who were never using TLS in the first place are now affected by the bug. However, those who use TLS to secure their networks must upgrade to Akka.NET V1.5.52 or later. One patch forces "fail fast" semantics if TLS is enabled but the private key is missing or invalid. Previous versions would only check that once connection attempts occurred. The second patch, a critical fix, enforces mutual TLS (mTLS) by default, so both parties must be keyed using the same certificate. As a workaround, avoid exposing the application publicly to avoid the vulnerability having a practical impact on one's application. However, upgrading to version 1.5.52 is still recommended by the maintainers.
Why
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Authentication Bypass by Spoofing → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-290 ↗
CWE-290: Authentication Bypass by Spoofing. This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.ATNoneAttack requirements: No additional deployment or execution condition is required.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- akka.net: >= 1.2.0, < 1.5.52
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 6 Oct 2025 · Last source change 6 Oct 2025, 17:05 UTC · CWE-290 · Authentication Bypass by Spoofing
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-31919
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.