VulnerabilityPublished 9 Sep 2025Updated 10 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-58753: 9001 copyparty · Missing Authorization

Affects 9001 copypartySource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.19.8 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.19.8

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 9 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 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 9001 copyparty to 1.19.8.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
9001 copyparty	Affected <1.19.8	Fixed in 1.19.8

AI-suggested

Upgrade copyparty installations to version 1.19.8 or later immediately to ensure the missing authorization checks are in place.
Review and restrict user privileges to the minimum necessary to reduce the risk of an attacker having the required privilege level to exploit this vulnerability.
Implement strong filename policies and avoid predictable or guessable filenames in shared folders to reduce the risk of unauthorized access by guessing.
Monitor access logs for unusual or repeated access attempts to sibling files that were not explicitly shared.
If possible, use filekeys or dirkeys to protect sensitive files and directories, as these are not affected by this vulnerability.
Conduct regular security audits and penetration tests focusing on file-sharing services to detect similar authorization issues.
Educate users about the risks of sharing files and the importance of proper permissions and naming conventions.

Description

Copyparty is a portable file server. In versions prior to 1.19.8, there was a missing permission-check in the shares feature (the `shr` global-option). When a share was created for just one file inside a folder, it was possible to access the other files inside that folder by guessing the filenames. It was not possible to descend into subdirectories in this manner; only the sibling files were accessible. This issue did not affect filekeys or dirkeys. Version 1.19.8 fixes the issue.

Impact

For European organizations using copyparty as a file-sharing solution, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive files stored alongside legitimately shared files. Since the vulnerability allows access to sibling files by guessing filenames, confidential or sensitive data could be exposed without proper authorization. This is particularly concerning for organizations handling personal data under GDPR, intellectual property, or other regulated information. Although the vulnerability does not allow access to subdirectories or files protected by additional keys, the exposure of sibling files could still result in data breaches. The requirement for some privilege level reduces the risk from external attackers but insider threats or compromised accounts could exploit this vulnerability. The lack of user interaction and remote network attack vector means exploitation could be automated once access is gained. The medium severity reflects the limited scope of impact but still significant confidentiality risk. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, legal, and government in Europe that use copyparty for file sharing should be particularly vigilant.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
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 access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied 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
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-552Files or Directories Accessible to External Parties (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product makes files or directories accessible to unauthorized actors, even though they should not be.
Implementation · System Configuration · Operation
When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to disable public access.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V12.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Collect Data from Common Resource Locations (opens in a new tab)
Probe System 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 17 Sep 2025, 00:53 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862, CWE-552

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats