CVE-2025-29865VulnerabilityPublished 7 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-29865: TAGFREE X-Free Uploader · Path Traversal

Affects TAGFREE X-Free UploaderSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 7 Aug 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 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
TAGFREE X-Free Uploader	Affected =1.0.1.0084 =2.0.1.0034	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately inventory their use of TAGFREE X-Free Uploader and identify affected versions (1.0.1.0084 and 2.0.1.0034). Until official patches are released, organizations should implement strict input validation and sanitization on file upload paths to prevent directory traversal sequences (e.g., '..\' or '../'). Deploy web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block path traversal attempts targeting the uploader endpoints. Restrict file system permissions for the uploader process to the minimum necessary directories, preventing access to sensitive areas even if traversal is attempted. Monitor logs for suspicious file access patterns or unexpected file modifications. Network segmentation can limit exposure by isolating servers running the uploader from broader internal networks. Organizations should subscribe to TAGFREE security advisories for timely patch releases and apply updates promptly. Additionally, conducting penetration testing focused on file upload functionalities can help identify residual vulnerabilities. Employing intrusion detection systems (IDS) with signatures for path traversal attacks can provide early warnings. Finally, consider alternative secure file upload solutions if immediate patching is not feasible.

Description

: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in TAGFREE X-Free Uploader XFU allows Path Traversal.This issue affects X-Free Uploader: from 1.0.1.0084 before 1.0.1.0085, from 2.0.1.0034 before 2.0.1.0035.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-29865 can be significant, especially for those relying on TAGFREE's X-Free Uploader for file management or web applications. Unauthorized access to sensitive files could lead to data breaches involving personal data protected under GDPR, resulting in regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Confidentiality breaches could expose intellectual property, customer data, or internal configurations, increasing the risk of further attacks such as lateral movement or privilege escalation. Since the vulnerability requires no authentication or user interaction, it can be exploited remotely by attackers scanning for vulnerable instances, increasing the attack surface. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure in Europe are particularly at risk due to the sensitivity of their data and regulatory requirements. Additionally, the ability to overwrite files could allow attackers to implant backdoors or malware, leading to persistent compromise. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive defense, but the high CVSS score indicates that exploitation would be impactful and relatively straightforward once exploit code becomes available.

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

boho.or.kr/kr/bbs/view.do?searchCnd=&bbsId=B0000302&searchWrd=&menuNo=205023&pageIndex=1&categoryCode=&nttId=71825 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Aug 2025, 02:18 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats