VulnerabilityPublished 15 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-62379: reflex · Open Redirect

Affects reflexSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.1 Low · fixed in 0.8.15 : update reflex when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.1Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 16% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.8.15

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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 15 Oct 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
PyPIreflex-dev/reflex`pkg:pypi/reflex-dev/reflex`Other threats	Affected >=0.5.4 <=0.8.14	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. Upgrade reflex to version 0.8.15 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. 2. In production environments, ensure that the environment variable GITHUB_CODESPACES_PORT_FORWARDING_DOMAIN is not set or removed to prevent activation of the vulnerable endpoint. 3. Implement strict input validation and sanitization for any redirect parameters, enforcing a whitelist of allowed domains or internal paths to prevent open redirects. 4. Educate users and developers about the risks of open redirects and encourage vigilance against suspicious URLs, especially those originating from reflex-based applications. 5. Monitor web application logs for unusual redirect_to parameter usage or unexpected redirection patterns. 6. If upgrading is not immediately possible, consider disabling or restricting access to the /auth-codespace endpoint in production environments. 7. Incorporate Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to restrict navigation to trusted domains, mitigating the impact of malicious redirects. 8. Conduct security reviews of environment variable configurations to avoid accidental exposure of Codespaces-specific variables in production.

Description

Reflex is a library to build full-stack web apps in pure Python. In versions 0.5.4 through 0.8.14, the /auth-codespace endpoint automatically assigns the redirect_to query parameter value directly to client-side links without any validation and triggers automatic clicks when the page loads in a GitHub Codespaces environment. This allows attackers to redirect users to arbitrary external URLs. The vulnerable route is only registered when a Codespaces environment is detected, and the detection is controlled by environment variables. The same behavior can be activated in production if the GITHUB_CODESPACES_PORT_FORWARDING_DOMAIN environment variable is set. The vulnerability occurs because the code assigns the redirect_to query parameter directly to a.href without any validation and immediately triggers a click (automatic navigation), allowing users to be sent to arbitrary external domains. The execution condition is based on the presence of a sessionStorage flag, meaning it triggers immediately on first visits or in incognito/private browsing windows, with no server-side origin/scheme whitelist or internal path enforcement defenses in place. This issue has been patched in version 0.8.15. As a workaround, users can ensure that GITHUB_CODESPACES_PORT_FORWARDING_DOMAIN is not set in a production environment.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary risk posed by this vulnerability is the potential for phishing and social engineering attacks leveraging the open redirect to lure users to malicious websites. This can lead to credential compromise, malware infections, or unauthorized access if users are tricked into providing sensitive information or downloading harmful content. Although the vulnerability itself does not directly compromise system confidentiality or availability, the indirect consequences can be significant, especially for organizations with employees or customers using reflex-based applications in GitHub Codespaces or production environments where the vulnerable configuration exists. The automatic redirection without user awareness increases the risk of successful exploitation. Organizations relying on reflex in development or production should be aware that attackers could exploit this flaw to undermine user trust and potentially escalate attacks. However, the low CVSS score and requirement for user interaction limit the overall severity. The threat is more relevant to organizations with a strong presence in software development using GitHub Codespaces or reflex-based deployments.

CWE-601URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: LowOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a redirect.
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
Use an intermediate disclaimer page that provides the user with a clear warning that they are leaving the current site. Implement a long timeout before the redirect occurs, or force the user to click on the link. Be careful to avoid XSS problems (CWE-79) when generating the disclaimer page.
Architecture and Design · Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.1.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross-Site Flashing (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 15 Oct 2025, 16:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-601

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats