CVE-2025-40745
Improper Certificate Validation: Is CVE-2025-40745 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Low signal — verdict needed
Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.
Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
A vulnerability has been identified in Siemens Software Center (All versions < V3.5.8.2), Simcenter 3D (All versions < V2506.6000), Simcenter Femap (All versions < V2506.0002), Simcenter STAR-CCM+ (All versions < V2602), Solid Edge SE2025 (All versions < V225.0 Update 13), Solid Edge SE2026 (All versions < V226.0 Update 04), Tecnomatix Plant Simulation (All versions < V2504.0008). Affected applications do not properly validate client certificates to connect to Analytics Service endpoint. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to perform man in the middle attacks.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-40745)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-40745"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-40745/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-40745"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
awaiting field verdictsNo account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.
Add a field note or remediationoptional
Related CVEs
Same weakness: CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation.
- CVE-2020-0601HIGH 8.1KEVEPSS 89%
A spoofing vulnerability exists in the way Windows CryptoAPI (Crypt32.dll) validates Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) certificates.An attacker could exploit the vulnerability by using a spoofed code-signing certificate to sign a malicious executable, making it appear the file was from a trusted, legitimate source, aka 'Windows CryptoAPI Spoofing Vulnerability'.
- CVE-2022-26923HIGH 8.8KEVEPSS 83%
Active Directory Domain Services Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability
- CVE-2026-3336HIGH 7.5Real · low riskEPSS 1%
Improper certificate validation in PKCS7_verify() in AWS-LC allows an unauthenticated user to bypass certificate chain verification when processing PKCS7 objects with multiple signers, except the final signer. Customers of AWS services do not need to take action. Applications using AWS-LC should upgrade to AWS-LC version 1.69.0.
- CVE-2026-24281HIGH 7.4Real · low riskEPSS 1%
Hostname verification in Apache ZooKeeper ZKTrustManager falls back to reverse DNS (PTR) when IP SAN validation fails, allowing attackers who control or spoof PTR records to impersonate ZooKeeper servers or clients with a valid certificate for the PTR name. It's important to note that attacker must present a certificate which is trusted by ZKTrustManager which makes the attack vector harder to exploit. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 3.8.6 or 3.9.5, which fixes this issue by introducing a new configuration option to disable reverse DNS lookup in client and quorum protocols.
- CVE-2026-27137HIGH 7.5Real · low riskEPSS 1%
When verifying a certificate chain which contains a certificate containing multiple email address constraints which share common local portions but different domain portions, these constraints will not be properly applied, and only the last constraint will be considered.
- CVE-2026-8286HIGH 8.1Real · low riskEPSS 1%
A vulnerability exists where a new transfer that uses STARTTLS to upgrade the connection might reuse an existing live connection even though the TLS configuration mismatches so it should not.