CVE-2025-27210VulnerabilityPublished 18 Jul 2025Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-27210: nodejs node · Path Traversal

Affects nodejs nodeSource CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-23084

Not known to be exploited · public exploit available (Exploit-DB) · 14% EPSS · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 14.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 96% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Jul 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
1 Exploit-DB entry, 2 days before disclosure
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

CVE ID reserved
by hackerone
2025-02-2001:00Z, 148 days before disclosure
First Exploit-DB entry (opens in a new tab)
NodeJS 24.x - Path Traversal
2025-07-16, 2 days before disclosure
CVE published
on cve.org
2025-07-1822:54Z, t = 0
In Threat Radar
record ingested
2025-07-1823:01Z, 7 minutes after disclosure

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 2026-10-25.

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 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
npmnode`pkg:npm/node`Other threats	Affected =20.0.0 =22.0.0 =24.0.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit their Node.js environments to identify usage of affected versions (20.0.0, 22.0.0, 24.0.0) on Windows platforms. Until official patches are released, developers should implement strict input validation and sanitization for any file path inputs, explicitly disallowing reserved Windows device names such as CON, PRN, AUX, NUL, COM1-COM9, and LPT1-LPT9. Avoid using path.join with untrusted input or implement custom wrappers that enforce safe path construction. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or Web Application Firewalls (WAF) with rules to detect and block suspicious path traversal attempts targeting device names. Monitor Node.js vendor channels and security advisories closely for patch releases and apply updates promptly. Conduct code reviews focusing on file system access patterns and consider isolating Node.js applications in containers or sandboxes to limit potential damage. Implement logging and alerting on unusual file access patterns to detect exploitation attempts early. Finally, educate development teams about the risks of improper path handling and the specifics of Windows device name vulnerabilities.

Description

An incomplete fix has been identified for CVE-2025-23084 in Node.js, specifically affecting Windows device names like CON, PRN, and AUX. This vulnerability affects Windows users of `path.join` API.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to confidentiality, especially for those running Node.js applications on Windows servers that handle sensitive or regulated data such as personal information, financial records, or intellectual property. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of files, potentially violating GDPR and other data protection regulations. The vulnerability's presence in widely used Node.js versions means many enterprises, including software development firms, cloud service providers, and critical infrastructure operators, could be affected. The ease of exploitation without authentication or user interaction increases the threat level, making automated attacks feasible. Organizations relying on Windows-based Node.js environments for web services, APIs, or backend processing are particularly vulnerable. The impact on integrity and availability is minimal based on current information, but confidentiality breaches alone can cause substantial reputational and financial damage. Additionally, the incomplete fix suggests that previous mitigation efforts were insufficient, highlighting the need for thorough patch management and code review. The absence of known exploits in the wild provides a window for proactive defense but should not lead to complacency.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2025, 21:44 UTC

Public exploits and detection1 Exploit-DB entry

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats