VulnerabilityPublished 3 Jul 2025Updated 8 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-49005: vercel next.js · HTTP Request/Response Smuggling

Affects vercel next.jsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low : upgrade to 15.3.3 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 41% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 15.3.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 3 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

Upgrade next to 15.3.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
npmnext`pkg:npm/next`Other threats	Affected >=15.3.0 <15.3.3	Fixed in 15.3.3

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 Next.js to version 15.3.3 or later and update Vercel CLI beyond version 42.2.0 to remediate the vulnerability. For self-hosted deployments, ensure that the CDN or caching layer correctly distinguishes between React Server Component payloads and standard HTML content in cache keys to prevent poisoning. This may involve configuring cache key policies or using cache-busting techniques specific to content type. Implement rigorous testing of cache behavior in staging environments to detect any inconsistencies. Additionally, organizations should monitor web traffic for anomalies indicative of cache poisoning, such as unexpected content served to users. Employing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers can mitigate the impact of malicious content injection resulting from cache poisoning. Finally, maintain an inventory of affected software versions and integrate vulnerability scanning into the CI/CD pipeline to prevent deployment of vulnerable versions.

Description

Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. In Next.js App Router from 15.3.0 to before 15.3.3 and Vercel CLI from 41.4.1 to 42.2.0, a cache poisoning vulnerability was found. The issue allowed page requests for HTML content to return a React Server Component (RSC) payload instead under certain conditions. When deployed to Vercel, this would only impact the browser cache, and would not lead to the CDN being poisoned. When self-hosted and deployed externally, this could lead to cache poisoning if the CDN does not properly distinguish between RSC / HTML in the cache keys. This issue has been resolved in Next.js 15.3.3.

Impact

For European organizations using Next.js versions between 15.3.0 and 15.3.3 or affected Vercel CLI versions, the vulnerability poses a risk primarily in self-hosted or externally deployed environments where CDNs do not properly segregate cache keys for RSC and HTML content. The impact includes potential cache poisoning, which can lead to users receiving incorrect or malicious content. This can undermine user trust, degrade service integrity, and potentially facilitate further attacks such as client-side code injection or session hijacking. While the vulnerability does not directly compromise server confidentiality or availability, the integrity of delivered content is at risk. Organizations relying on Vercel's managed platform are less affected since the issue is confined to browser cache poisoning, which is less severe. European organizations with stringent data protection regulations and high standards for web application security may face reputational damage and compliance challenges if exploited. The risk is heightened for sectors with high web traffic and sensitive user interactions, such as finance, e-commerce, and government services.

CWE-444Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.
Implementation
Use a web server that employs a strict HTTP parsing procedure, such as Apache.
Implementation
Use only SSL communication.
Implementation
Terminate the client session after each request.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
HTTP Response Smuggling (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Request Smuggling (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 14 Jul 2025, 21:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-444

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats