CVE-2025-64511VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64511: 1Panel-dev MaxKB · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects 1Panel-dev MaxKBSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.4 High : upgrade to 2.3.1 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.4High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.3.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

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: 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 Nov 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 2026-10-26.

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

Upgrade 1panel-dev/MaxKB to 2.3.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHub1panel-dev/MaxKB`pkg:github/1panel-dev/MaxKB`Other threats	Affected <2.3.1	Fixed in 2.3.1

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

AI-suggested

Beyond applying the official patch to upgrade MaxKB to version 2.3.1 or later, European organizations should implement several targeted mitigations: 1) Enforce strict network segmentation to isolate internal services and databases from application servers running MaxKB, limiting SSRF attack surface. 2) Deploy egress filtering and outbound request whitelisting on servers hosting MaxKB to prevent unauthorized internal network requests. 3) Monitor and log all outbound requests from MaxKB instances for unusual or unexpected destinations to detect potential exploitation attempts. 4) Conduct regular code audits and sandbox environment reviews to ensure no bypasses exist in custom or third-party modules. 5) Restrict user privileges further to minimize the number of users able to execute code within MaxKB’s tool module. 6) Implement intrusion detection systems (IDS) tuned to detect SSRF patterns and anomalous internal network traffic. 7) Educate security teams about this vulnerability and encourage proactive threat hunting for SSRF indicators in enterprise environments.

Description

CVE-2025-64511 is a high-severity Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability affecting MaxKB, an open-source AI assistant for enterprise by 1Panel-dev. Versions prior to 2.3.1 allow authenticated users with low privileges to execute Python code within a sandboxed tool module, which can be exploited to access internal network services such as databases. Although the code runs in a sandbox, the SSRF enables attackers to bypass network restrictions and potentially compromise confidentiality, integrity, and availability of internal resources. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 7.4, indicating a significant risk, especially in environments where MaxKB is deployed with sensitive internal services. No known exploits are reported in the wild yet, but patching to version 2.3.1 is critical.

Impact

For European organizations, this SSRF vulnerability poses a substantial risk to internal network security, especially for enterprises relying on MaxKB for AI-assisted operations involving sensitive data or critical infrastructure. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to internal databases, leakage of confidential information, data integrity compromise, and potential service outages. This is particularly concerning for sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government agencies where data confidentiality and service availability are paramount. The ability to perform SSRF with low privileges and no user interaction increases the likelihood of automated attacks or insider threats exploiting this vulnerability. Additionally, the scope change indicated in the CVSS vector suggests that the vulnerability can affect components beyond the initially compromised system, amplifying the potential damage. Given the interconnected nature of enterprise networks in Europe, a successful attack could cascade, affecting multiple systems and services.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/1Panel-dev/MaxKB/security/advisories/GHSA-9287-g7px-9rp4 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 16:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats