VulnerabilityPublished 15 Oct 2025Updated 17 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-62382: blakeblackshear frigate · External Control of File Name or Path

Affects blakeblackshear frigateSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 0.16.2 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.16.2

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 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 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 blakeblackshear/frigate to 0.16.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubblakeblackshear/frigate`pkg:github/blakeblackshear/frigate`Other threats	Affected <0.16.2	Fixed in 0.16.2

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade all Frigate installations to version 0.16.2 or later to remediate this vulnerability. Until upgrades are completed, restrict API access strictly to trusted and authenticated users, employing strong authentication mechanisms and role-based access controls to minimize exposure. Monitor API usage logs for unusual export requests or attempts to specify suspicious file paths. Implement network segmentation to isolate NVR appliances from broader enterprise networks, limiting lateral movement opportunities. Employ host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS) to detect anomalous file access or copying activities on the Frigate host. Review and harden file system permissions to ensure that the Frigate process cannot access sensitive files unnecessarily. Conduct regular audits of exported video clips directories to detect unauthorized files. Educate operators and administrators about the risks of arbitrary path specification and enforce policies prohibiting unsafe export practices. Finally, maintain up-to-date backups of configuration and user data to enable recovery in case of compromise.

Description

Frigate is a network video recorder (NVR) with realtime local object detection for IP cameras. Prior to 0.16.2, Frigate's export workflow allows an authenticated operator to nominate any filesystem location as the thumbnail source for a video export. Because that path is copied verbatim into the publicly served clips directory, the feature can be abused to read arbitrary files that reside on the host running Frigate. In practice, a low-privilege user with API access can pivot from viewing camera footage to exfiltrating sensitive configuration files, secrets, or user data from the appliance itself. This behavior violates the principle of least privilege for the export subsystem and turns a convenience feature into a direct information disclosure vector, with exploitation hinging on a short race window while the background exporter copies the chosen file into place before cleanup runs. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.16.2.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the confidentiality of sensitive data stored on Frigate NVR appliances. Many organizations in sectors such as critical infrastructure, transportation, retail, and public safety rely on IP camera systems for security monitoring. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized disclosure of configuration files, credentials, or personal data, potentially violating GDPR and other data protection regulations. The ability for a low-privilege user to escalate access and exfiltrate data increases insider threat risks and could facilitate further lateral movement within networks. The exposure of secrets and configuration data could also enable attackers to compromise other connected systems or disrupt surveillance operations. Given the widespread adoption of IP camera solutions in European enterprises and public institutions, the vulnerability could impact a broad range of organizations, especially those with less mature API access controls. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, as the vulnerability is straightforward to exploit once authenticated. Failure to patch could lead to regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and operational disruptions.

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 22 Oct 2025, 18:45 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-73

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats