VulnerabilityPublished 20 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-46385: Emby Windows · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects Emby WindowsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.6 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.6High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: 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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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 Jul 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 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
Emby Windows	Affected =4.8	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include restricting external access to the Emby Server, ideally limiting it to trusted internal networks or VPNs. 2. Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to restrict the Emby server's ability to initiate outbound requests to sensitive internal services. 3. Monitor network traffic from the Emby server for unusual outbound requests, especially to internal IP ranges or unexpected domains. 4. Apply strict input validation and filtering on any user-supplied URLs or parameters that Emby processes, if configurable. 5. 6. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with rules to detect and block SSRF patterns targeting the Emby server. 7. Conduct internal audits of Emby server configurations to disable unnecessary features or plugins that might increase attack surface. 8. Educate IT staff about this vulnerability to ensure rapid incident response if suspicious activity is detected.

Description

CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Impact

For European organizations using Emby Server 4.8 on Windows, this SSRF vulnerability poses a significant risk. Attackers could exploit this flaw to send unauthorized requests from the Emby server to internal network services, potentially accessing sensitive internal APIs, databases, or other backend systems. This could lead to data integrity compromise, unauthorized modification of media libraries or configurations, or further lateral movement within the network. Given that Emby is often deployed in home, small business, and some enterprise environments for media streaming, organizations relying on it for internal content distribution or media management could face operational disruptions or data tampering. The lack of required authentication and user interaction increases the risk of automated exploitation attempts. Although no known exploits are currently active, the high CVSS score and ease of exploitation suggest that attackers may develop exploits soon after public disclosure. European organizations must be vigilant, especially those with less mature network segmentation or those exposing Emby servers to the internet, as this could allow attackers to leverage the SSRF to reach internal resources that are otherwise protected.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

gov.il/en/departments/dynamiccollectors/cve_advisories_listing?skip=0 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Jul 2025, 01:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats