VulnerabilityPublished 25 Sep 2025Updated 26 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-56769: Command Injection

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium · fixed in 5.8.4 : update chinabugotech hutool when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 27% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: chinabugotech hutool before 5.8.4
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.8.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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: 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 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 25 Sep 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

AI-suggested

European organizations should take immediate steps to mitigate the risk posed by CVE-2025-56769. First, identify all applications and services using the Hutool library, especially versions prior to 5.8.4. Since no official patches are currently available, organizations should consider upgrading to version 5.8.4 or later once released. In the interim, restrict or sanitize all inputs that are processed by the QLExpressEngine to prevent injection of malicious expressions. Implement strict input validation and employ allow-listing for expressions where feasible. Additionally, apply runtime application self-protection (RASP) or Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious expression evaluation patterns. Conduct thorough code reviews and penetration testing focused on expression evaluation components. Monitor logs for unusual method invocation patterns or unexpected expression executions. Finally, enforce the principle of least privilege for application components to limit the impact of any successful exploitation.

Description

An issue was discovered in chinabugotech hutool before 5.8.4 allowing attackers to execute arbitrary expressions that lead to arbitrary method invocation and potentially remote code execution (RCE) via the QLExpressEngine class.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-56769 can be significant, particularly for those relying on Java-based applications that incorporate the Hutool library for expression evaluation or utility functions. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information (confidentiality impact) and unauthorized modification of application logic or data (integrity impact). Although availability is not directly affected, the breach of confidentiality and integrity can result in compliance violations under GDPR and other data protection regulations, leading to legal and financial repercussions. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, which often use Java-based enterprise applications, may face increased risks. Additionally, the ability to execute arbitrary code remotely without authentication makes this vulnerability attractive to attackers aiming to establish footholds or move laterally within networks. The lack of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the potential for rapid weaponization exists once exploit code becomes available.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/chinabugotech/hutool/issues/3994 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Oct 2025, 00:35 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats