Skip to main content
VulnerabilityPublished

CVE-2025-14542: python-utcp · Trust Boundary Violation

Affects python-utcpSource CVE Database V5

0

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score
7.5High
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:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Exploitation evidence

  1. Disclosed: evidence found.

    CVE published 13 Dec 2025

  2. Detectable: no evidence on record.

    No public nuclei template indexed

  3. Weaponised: no evidence on record.

    No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB

  4. Exploited in the wild: no evidence on record.

    Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation

  5. Observed by OffSeq 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.

What to do

Affected software

ProductAffectedFixed in
PyPIpython-utcppkg:pypi/python-utcpOther threatsAffected
  • =0
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-2025-14542, organizations should implement strict validation and integrity checks on any remotely fetched JSON manuals. This includes enforcing cryptographic signatures or checksums to verify the authenticity and integrity of manuals before execution. Clients should be configured to only accept manuals from trusted and verified providers, with explicit allowlists and endpoint authentication. Employing network segmentation and monitoring to detect unusual manual update patterns or unexpected changes can help identify exploitation attempts. User interaction requirements suggest that user training and awareness campaigns about suspicious prompts or updates are critical. Additionally, organizations should consider implementing manual version pinning or caching to avoid automatic acceptance of updated manuals without review. Regular security assessments of tooling frameworks and their update mechanisms should be conducted. Finally, engaging with vendors and monitoring for patches or advisories related to this vulnerability is essential for timely remediation.

Description

The vulnerability arises when a client fetches a tools’ JSON specification, known as a Manual, from a remote Manual Endpoint. While a provider may initially serve a benign manual (e.g., one defining an HTTP tool call), earning the clients’ trust, a malicious provider can later change the manual to exploit the client.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…