VulnerabilityPublished 9 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-49138: haxtheweb issues · Path Traversal

Affects haxtheweb issuesSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 11.0.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:55 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 11.0.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 9 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 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 haxtheweb/issues to 11.0.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubhaxtheweb/issues`pkg:github/haxtheweb/issues`Other threats	Affected <11.0.0	Fixed in 11.0.0

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

AI-suggested

Immediate upgrade to HAX CMS version 11.0.0 or later, which contains the fix for this vulnerability by properly validating and sanitizing the location field input.
If immediate upgrade is not feasible, implement web application firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block requests containing suspicious relative path traversal patterns (e.g., '../') in the location parameter of the /system/api/saveOutline endpoint.
Restrict access to the saveOutline API endpoint to only trusted, authenticated users with a need to modify site outlines, and enforce strong authentication and session management controls to reduce risk of credential compromise.
Conduct regular audits of site.json files and server logs to detect unusual file access patterns or unauthorized modifications.
Implement file system permissions to limit the web server user’s read access strictly to necessary directories, minimizing exposure of sensitive files even if traversal is attempted.
Educate developers and administrators on secure coding practices related to input validation and path handling to prevent similar issues in custom extensions or integrations.
Monitor threat intelligence feeds for any emerging exploit attempts targeting this vulnerability to enable rapid incident response.

Description

HAX CMS PHP allows users to manage their microsite universe with a PHP backend. Prior to version 11.0.0, an authenticated Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability in the HAXCMS saveOutline endpoint allows a low-privileged user to read arbitrary files on the server by manipulating the location field written into site.json. This enables attackers to exfiltrate sensitive system files such as /etc/passwd, application secrets, or configuration files accessible to the web server (www-data). The vulnerability stems from the way the HAXCMS backend handles the location field in the site's outline. When a user sends a POST request to /system/api/saveOutline, the backend stores the provided location value directly into the site.json file associated with the site, without validating or sanitizing the input. Later the location parameter is interpreted by the CMS to resolve and load the content for a given node. If the location field contains a relative path like `../../../etc/passwd`, the application will attempt to read and render that file. Version 11.0.0 fixes the issue.

Impact

For European organizations using HAX CMS versions prior to 11.0.0, this vulnerability poses a significant confidentiality risk. Attackers with low-level authenticated access can read arbitrary files on the server, potentially exposing sensitive system information, user credentials, or application secrets. This could lead to further compromise if attackers leverage exposed credentials or configuration details to escalate privileges or pivot within the network. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact integrity or availability, the exposure of confidential data can have severe consequences including data breaches, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR), reputational damage, and potential financial penalties. Organizations hosting microsites or internal portals using vulnerable HAX CMS instances are particularly at risk. Since exploitation requires authentication, insider threats or compromised user accounts increase risk. The lack of user interaction requirement facilitates automated exploitation once credentials are obtained. Given the medium severity and the nature of the vulnerability, European entities should prioritize patching to prevent data exfiltration and maintain compliance with data protection regulations.

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).
CWE-73External Control of File Name or Path (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product allows user input to control or influence paths or file names that are used in filesystem operations.
Architecture and Design
When the set of filenames is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt".
Architecture and Design · Operation
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict all access to files within a particular directory.
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…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Leverage Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
URL Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (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 10 Jul 2025, 23:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22, CWE-73

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats