VulnerabilityPublished 30 May 2025

CVE-2025-48381: cvat · Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data

Affects cvatSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 2.38.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.38.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: Low
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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 May 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 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

Upgrade cvat-ai/cvat to 2.38.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubcvat-ai/cvat`pkg:github/cvat-ai/cvat`Other threats	Affected 2.4.0 <2.38.0	Fixed in 2.38.0

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 promptly upgrade all CVAT instances to version 2.38.0 or later, where this vulnerability is patched. Until the upgrade is applied, organizations should enforce strict access controls and monitor authenticated user activities to detect unusual enumeration or resource-intensive requests. Implementing rate limiting on API endpoints that expose task, project, label, job, and quality report metadata can help mitigate resource exhaustion risks. Additionally, organizations should ensure strong authentication mechanisms, such as multi-factor authentication (MFA), to reduce the risk of credential compromise. Regular audits of user permissions and session logs can help identify potential insider threats or misuse. Network segmentation and isolation of CVAT instances from broader enterprise networks can limit the impact of any exploitation. Finally, organizations should maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans to quickly recover from potential denial of service or other disruptions.

Description

Computer Vision Annotation Tool (CVAT) is an interactive video and image annotation tool for computer vision. In versions starting from 2.4.0 to before 2.38.0, an authenticated CVAT user may be able to retrieve the IDs and names of all tasks, projects, labels, and the IDs of all jobs and quality reports on the CVAT instance. In addition, if the instance contains many resources of a particular type, retrieving this information may tie up system resources, denying access to legitimate users. This issue has been patched in version 2.38.0.

Impact

For European organizations using CVAT for computer vision annotation tasks, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily related to information disclosure and potential service disruption. The exposure of task, project, label, job, and quality report identifiers and names could aid an attacker in reconnaissance activities, enabling them to map out the structure and scope of ongoing projects. This could facilitate further targeted attacks or unauthorized data access if combined with other vulnerabilities or insider threats. The potential for resource exhaustion leading to denial of service could disrupt critical annotation workflows, delaying development and deployment of AI models, which may impact sectors relying on timely computer vision data processing such as automotive, healthcare, manufacturing, and security. Although the vulnerability requires authenticated access, insider threats or compromised credentials could be leveraged to exploit it. The impact on confidentiality is limited to metadata exposure rather than direct access to annotated data or raw images, but the operational disruption risk elevates the overall concern. Given the growing adoption of AI and computer vision technologies in Europe, especially in research institutions and enterprises, this vulnerability could affect organizations relying on CVAT for annotation pipelines.

CWE-201Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The code transmits data to another actor, but a portion of the data includes sensitive information that should not be accessible to that actor.
Requirements
Specify which data in the software should be regarded as sensitive. Consider which types of users should have access to which types of data.
Implementation
Ensure that any possibly sensitive data specified in the requirements is verified with designers to ensure that it is either a calculated risk or mitigated elsewhere.
System Configuration
Setup default error messages so that unexpected errors do not disclose sensitive information.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Choosing Message Identifier (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Incorrectly Configured SSL/TLS (opens in a new tab)
WiFi MAC Address Tracking (opens in a new tab)
WiFi SSID Tracking (opens in a new tab)
Cellular Broadcast Message Request (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 21:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-201

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats