LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2025-64105: FOSSBilling: IDOR Vulnerability in Support Ticket Creation

FOSSBilling is a billing and client management system that automates invoicing, payments, and communication for online service businesses. Versions 0.6.21 through 0.7.2 are vulnerable to IDOR through the support ticket creation workflow. By manipulating rel_id when rel_type=order, an authenticated client can create a support ticket that references another client's order they do not own. The ticketCreateForClient() method accepted rel_id without verifying order ownership for non-upgrade tasks, allowing clients to link a new ticket to another client's order by crafting the request. No cron task automatically processes cancel/upgrade requests from ticket relations; staff action is required. This affects integrity and confidentiality: staff could be misled into acting on the wrong order (e.g., cancellation or upgrade requests). While there is no client-to-client order data exposure, order IDs may appear in ticket context. This issue has been fixed in version 0.8.0.

MediumCVSS 5.1Not KEV-listedUpdated
Discuss exposureBack to CVEs
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysismoderate

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

FOSSBilling had an authorization flaw in support ticket creation. A logged-in client could make a ticket point to another client's order. The main business risk is staff being misled into changing the wrong order, such as cancellation or upgrade handling, rather than automated takeover or broad data theft.

Executive priority

Treat this as a moderate-priority integrity issue for any exposed FOSSBilling client portal. Patch during the next security maintenance window, faster if support staff routinely process order changes from tickets without independent verification.

Technical view

CVE-2025-64105 is a CWE-639 IDOR in FOSSBilling 0.6.21 through 0.7.2. ticketCreateForClient() accepted rel_id with rel_type=order without verifying order ownership for non-upgrade tasks. The issue is fixed in 0.8.0. Sources state no client-to-client order data exposure, though order IDs may appear in ticket context.

Likely exposure

Exposure is limited to FOSSBilling deployments running versions 0.6.21 through 0.7.2 with authenticated client access to support ticket creation. Public client portals increase reach, but the flaw requires a valid client account and staff action for meaningful operational impact.

Exploitation context

The source bundle does not report active exploitation, and the CVE is not listed as KEV. The issue is network-reachable and low-complexity for authenticated clients, but business impact depends on staff trusting a ticket relation and acting on the wrong order.

Researcher notes

The key boundary is authorization on rel_id when rel_type=order. The advisory narrows impact: no automated cron processing of cancel or upgrade requests and no direct client-to-client order data exposure. Validation should focus on ownership checks and historical ticket-order associations, not broad data exfiltration.

Mitigation direction

  • Upgrade FOSSBilling to version 0.8.0 or later.
  • Prioritize systems running versions 0.6.21 through 0.7.2.
  • Review support tickets linked to order relations for mismatched client ownership.
  • Ensure staff validate requested order changes against the authenticated account before acting.
  • Monitor the vendor advisory and release notes for follow-up guidance.

Validation and detection

  • Confirm deployed FOSSBilling versions are outside the vulnerable range.
  • Verify support ticket order relations enforce authenticated client ownership.
  • Audit recent order-linked tickets for cross-client ownership mismatches.
  • Confirm staff procedures require independent order ownership checks before changes.
  • Review the 0.8.0 update notes and advisory against deployed code.
Prepared
Confidence
high
Sources
4

Public sources used

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

cwe · low confidence lookup

CWE-639: Exact CWE lookup

Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2025-64105 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Medium
CVSS
5.1 (4.0)
Known Exploited
No
Published

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N

Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

1CVSS vectors
3Timeline events
1ADP providers
3Source links

SSVC decision data

CISA-ADPCISA Coordinator
Timestamp
Version
2.0.3
Exploitation: noneAutomatable: yesTechnical Impact: partial

CVSS vector scores

1 official score

We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.

ScoreVersionSeverityVectorExploitImpactSource
5.1CVSS 4.0MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N——GitHub_M

Vulnerability scoring details

Base CVSS 4.0 score

5.1Medium
CVSS 4.0 vector shape for CVE-2025-64105Attack VectorAttack ComplexityAttack RequirementsPrivileges RequiredUser InteractionVS ConfidentialityVS IntegrityVS AvailabilitySS ConfidentialitySS IntegritySS Availability

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:L/SA:N

Attack Vector
NetworkAdjacentLocalPhysical
Attack Complexity
LowHigh
Attack Requirements
NonePresent
Privileges Required
NoneLowHigh
User Interaction
NonePassiveActive
VS Confidentiality
HighLowNone
VS Integrity
HighLowNone
VS Availability
HighLowNone
SS Confidentiality
HighLowNone
SS Integrity
HighLowNone
SS Availability
HighLowNone

Vulnerability timeline

Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.

  1. CVE reservedCVE Program

    The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.

  2. CVE publishedCVE Program

    The CVE record was published.

  3. CVE updatedCVE Program

    The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.

ADP provider summaries

CISA-ADPCISA ADP Vulnrichment
other:ssvc

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
FOSSBillingFOSSBilling>= 0.6.21, < 0.8.0Listed
Weakness

CWE details

CWE-639

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.

CWE-639 · source CWE mapping

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.

Open CWE intelligenceSame-CWE CVEs