VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2025Updated 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-0508: aws/sagemaker-python-sdk · Reversible One-Way Hash

Affects aws/sagemaker-python-sdkSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

5.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 18% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: High
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Mar 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
PyPIaws-sagemaker-python-sdk`pkg:pypi/aws-sagemaker-python-sdk`Other threats	Affected *	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-0508, organizations should immediately review their use of the aws/sagemaker-python-sdk, particularly the Workflow component's reliance on MD5 hashes for caching results. They should: 1) Avoid using MD5 hashes as unique identifiers for workflow results; instead, transition to stronger cryptographic hash functions such as SHA-256 or SHA-3, which offer resistance to collision attacks. 2) Implement additional validation mechanisms to detect and prevent hash collisions, such as incorporating configuration metadata or versioning into cache keys. 3) Where possible, disable or bypass caching mechanisms that rely solely on MD5 hashes until a vendor patch is available. 4) Monitor AWS and SageMaker SDK updates for official patches or guidance addressing this vulnerability. 5) Conduct integrity checks on ML pipeline outputs to detect anomalies potentially caused by reused or corrupted cached results. 6) Educate development and DevOps teams about the risks of weak hashing algorithms in security-sensitive contexts. These steps will reduce the risk of integrity violations and maintain trustworthiness in ML workflows.

Description

A vulnerability in the SageMaker Workflow component of aws/sagemaker-python-sdk allows for the possibility of MD5 hash collisions in all versions. This can lead to workflows being inadvertently replaced due to the reuse of results from different configurations that produce the same MD5 hash. This issue can cause integrity problems within the pipeline, potentially leading to erroneous processing outcomes.

Impact

For European organizations leveraging AWS SageMaker for machine learning workflows, this vulnerability poses a risk to the integrity of their data processing pipelines. Erroneous reuse of cached workflow results due to MD5 collisions can lead to inaccurate model training, flawed predictions, and ultimately poor decision-making based on compromised outputs. This is particularly critical for sectors such as finance, healthcare, automotive, and critical infrastructure, where machine learning outcomes directly influence operational safety, compliance, and customer trust. While confidentiality and availability remain unaffected, the integrity breach can cause cascading effects, including regulatory non-compliance if data accuracy is mandated, reputational damage, and financial losses from incorrect business decisions. The remote and unauthenticated nature of the vulnerability increases the attack surface, though the high complexity reduces the likelihood of widespread exploitation. Organizations using automated or large-scale ML pipelines are at greater risk due to the reliance on workflow caching mechanisms.

CWE-328Use of Weak Hash (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses an algorithm that produces a digest (output value) that does not meet security expectations for a hash function that allows an adversary to reasonably determine the original input (preimage attack), find another input that can produce the same hash (2nd preimage attack), or find multiple inputs that evaluate to the same hash (birthday attack).
Architecture and Design
Use an adaptive hash function that can be configured to change the amount of computational effort needed to compute the hash, such as the number of iterations ("stretching") or the amount of memory required. Some hash functions perform salting automatically.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.3 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Subvert Code-signing Facilities (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 13:04 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-328

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats