CVE-2025-49135VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-49135: cvat · Insecure Direct Object Reference

Affects cvatSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 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.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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: 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: 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: 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 25 Jun 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
GitHubcvat-ai/cvat`pkg:github/cvat-ai/cvat`Other threats	Affected >=2.2.0 <=2.39.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate upgrade to CVAT version 2.40.0 or later, which includes the patch validating file ownership during import. 2. Implement strict access controls and monitoring on CVAT user accounts to detect unusual import activities or access patterns, including logging and alerting on project/task imports referencing files outside a user's ownership. 3. Enforce strong authentication mechanisms such as multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce risk of account compromise. 4. Conduct regular audits of uploaded files and project backups to identify any unauthorized access or anomalies. 5. Limit the distribution of file name information and consider obfuscating or randomizing file identifiers to reduce the risk of attackers guessing valid filenames. 6. Where possible, segregate sensitive datasets and restrict CVAT user roles to minimize exposure. 7. Educate users on the importance of safeguarding their credentials and recognizing suspicious activity within CVAT. 8. If upgrading immediately is not feasible, consider network segmentation or firewall rules to restrict access to the CVAT instance to trusted users only, reducing the attack surface.

Description

CVAT is an open source interactive video and image annotation tool for computer vision. Versions 2.2.0 through 2.39.0 have no validation during the import process of a project or task backup to check that the filename specified in the query parameter refers to a TUS-uploaded file belonging to the same user. As a result, if an attacker with a CVAT account and a `user` role knows the filenames of other users' uploads, they could potentially access and steal data by creating projects or tasks using those files. This issue does not affect annotation or dataset TUS uploads, since in this case object-specific temporary directories are used. Users should upgrade to CVAT 2.40.0 or a later version to receive a patch. No known workarounds are available.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those involved in AI, computer vision research, and data annotation, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to data confidentiality. Unauthorized access to uploaded files could lead to exposure of proprietary datasets, personally identifiable information (PII), or sensitive project data. This could result in intellectual property theft, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR violations), and reputational damage. Since CVAT is used in sectors such as automotive, healthcare, and manufacturing across Europe, unauthorized data disclosure could impact competitive advantage and client trust. The vulnerability requires only authenticated user access, which means insider threats or compromised user accounts could be leveraged to exploit this flaw. The lack of user interaction and low attack complexity increases the likelihood of exploitation once an attacker has valid credentials. Although availability and integrity are not directly impacted, the confidentiality breach alone is critical given the sensitivity of annotated datasets. The absence of known exploits suggests limited current exploitation but does not preclude future attacks, especially as awareness grows.

CWE-639Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #24OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.
Architecture and Design
For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
Architecture and Design
Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V4.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (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 25 Jun 2025, 15:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-639

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats