VulnerabilityPublished 30 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-53944: Significant-Gravitas AutoGPT · Improper Authorization

Affects Significant-Gravitas AutoGPTSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 0.6.16 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.6.16

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: 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: 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 30 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 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 Significant-Gravitas AutoGPT to 0.6.16.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Significant-Gravitas AutoGPT	Affected <0.6.16	Fixed in 0.6.16

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade AutoGPT to version 0.6.16 or later to remediate this vulnerability. Until patching is possible, organizations should restrict access to the external API endpoints to trusted networks and users, implement strict monitoring and logging of API calls to detect anomalous access patterns, and enforce strong authentication and authorization controls, including multi-factor authentication to reduce the risk of credential compromise. Additionally, organizations should conduct audits of existing execution results access logs to identify potential unauthorized access. Network segmentation and API gateway policies can be employed to limit exposure of the vulnerable endpoint. Developers should review custom integrations with AutoGPT to ensure they do not bypass internal API protections. Finally, organizations should incorporate this vulnerability into their incident response plans and ensure staff are aware of the risk and remediation steps.

Description

AutoGPT is a platform that allows users to create, deploy, and manage continuous artificial intelligence agents. In v0.6.15 and below, the external API's get_graph_execution_results endpoint has an authorization bypass vulnerability. While it correctly validates user access to the graph_id, it fails to verify ownership of the graph_exec_id parameter, allowing authenticated users to access any execution results by providing arbitrary execution IDs. The internal API implements proper validation for both parameters. This is fixed in v0.6.16.

Impact

For European organizations using AutoGPT, especially those leveraging AI agents for sensitive or proprietary workflows, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to confidentiality. Unauthorized access to execution results could expose sensitive AI decision-making data, intellectual property, or personal data processed by the AI agents. This could lead to data breaches, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR violations), and loss of competitive advantage. Since the vulnerability does not affect integrity or availability, operational disruption is unlikely, but the exposure of confidential information alone can have severe reputational and financial consequences. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, research, and government that adopt AutoGPT for AI automation are particularly at risk. The requirement for authentication limits exploitation to insiders or compromised accounts, but insider threats or credential theft scenarios remain plausible. The scope change indicates that attackers can access data beyond their authorized domain, increasing the severity of the breach.

CWE-285Improper Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform or incorrectly performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that you perform access control checks related to your business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that you apply to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (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 30 Jul 2025, 15:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-285

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats