VulnerabilityPublished 25 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10974: giantspatula SewKinect · Deserialization

Affects giantspatula SewKinectSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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

AI-suggested

Implement strict input validation and sanitization on all data passed to the /calculate endpoint to prevent malicious serialized objects from being processed.
Where possible, disable or replace the use of pickle.loads with safer serialization libraries that do not allow arbitrary code execution, such as JSON or protobuf.
Employ network-level protections such as firewalls and intrusion detection/prevention systems to restrict access to the vulnerable endpoint, limiting it to trusted internal networks.
Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual activity indicative of deserialization attacks, such as unexpected payloads or anomalous requests to /calculate.
Engage with the vendor giantspatula to obtain timely updates or patches, and test rolling releases carefully to ensure the vulnerability is addressed.
Apply the principle of least privilege to the SewKinect service account to minimize the impact of potential exploitation.
Consider deploying application-layer security controls like Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) configured to detect and block malicious serialized payloads targeting this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in giantspatula SewKinect up to 7fd963ceb3385af3706af02b8a128a13399dffb1. This affects the function pickle.loads of the file /calculate of the component Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument body_parts/point_cloud leads to deserialization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product operates on a rolling release basis, ensuring continuous delivery. Consequently, there are no version details for either affected or updated releases.

Impact

For European organizations using giantspatula SewKinect, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary code remotely on affected systems, potentially leading to data breaches, system manipulation, or disruption of services. Given the partial impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, sensitive data processed by SewKinect could be exposed or altered, and system availability could be degraded. Organizations in sectors relying on SewKinect for endpoint calculations or data processing—such as manufacturing, healthcare, or research—may face operational disruptions or intellectual property theft. The remote, unauthenticated nature of the exploit increases the attack surface, especially for internet-facing deployments. The rolling release model complicates timely patching, potentially leaving systems vulnerable for extended periods. Additionally, the public disclosure of the exploit code raises the risk of opportunistic attacks targeting European entities.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…