CVE-2025-64529VulnerabilityPublished 10 Nov 2025Updated 12 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64529: authzed spicedb · Unthrottled Resource Allocation

Affects authzed spicedbSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.7 Low : upgrade to 1.45.2 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

2.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 18% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.45.2

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: Unreported

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 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.
Exploit Maturity: Unreported: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · No knowledge of publicly available proof-of-concept · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 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 2026-10-25.

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 authzed/spicedb to 1.45.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubauthzed/spicedb`pkg:github/authzed/spicedb`Other threats	Affected <1.45.2	Fixed in 1.45.2

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 upgrade SpiceDB to version 1.45.2 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until upgrading is feasible, they should configure the `--write-relationships-max-updates-per-call` parameter to 1000 or lower to prevent triggering the issue. It is critical to audit authorization schemas for the use of the exclusion operator and review the size and frequency of WriteRelationships API calls to avoid large payloads that exceed datastore limits. Implement monitoring and alerting on WriteRelationships call failures and permission check anomalies to detect potential exploitation or misconfigurations. Additionally, organizations should conduct thorough testing of permission evaluations after applying updates or configuration changes to ensure correctness. Where possible, segment and isolate systems using SpiceDB to limit the blast radius of incorrect permission evaluations. Finally, maintain an inventory of affected systems and ensure that security teams are aware of the vulnerability and mitigation steps.

Description

SpiceDB is an open source database system for creating and managing security-critical application permissions. In versions prior to 1.45.2, users who use the exclusion operator somewhere in their authorization schema; have configured their SpiceDB server such that `--write-relationships-max-updates-per-call` is bigger than 6500; and issue calls to WriteRelationships with a large enough number of updates that cause the payload to be bigger than what their datastore allows; will receive a successful response from their `WriteRelationships` call, when in reality that call failed, and receive incorrect permission check results, if those relationships had to be read to resolve the relation involving the exclusion. Version 1.45.2 contains a patch for the issue. As a workaround, set `--write-relationships-max-updates-per-call` to `1000`.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of this vulnerability lies in the potential for incorrect permission checks, which can lead to unauthorized access or denial of legitimate access to sensitive resources. Organizations using SpiceDB to enforce fine-grained, security-critical permissions in applications such as financial services, healthcare, or government systems may face risks of data exposure or operational disruption. Although the vulnerability does not directly allow attackers to execute arbitrary code or escalate privileges, the integrity of authorization decisions is compromised, which can undermine trust in security controls. The silent failure of WriteRelationships calls can also complicate incident detection and response, as administrators may believe updates succeeded when they did not. This can affect compliance with data protection regulations like GDPR if unauthorized data access occurs. The low CVSS score suggests limited immediate risk, but the impact is context-dependent, particularly for organizations with complex authorization schemas using the exclusion operator and large-scale relationship updates. The absence of known exploits reduces urgency but does not eliminate risk, especially as attackers may develop techniques to exploit this flaw over time.

CWE-770Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #25
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
Requirements
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Architecture and Design
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V11.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Exponential Data Expansion (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data Parameter Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data with Nested Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Oversized Serialized Data Payloads (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/authzed/spicedb/security/advisories/GHSA-pm3x-jrhh-qcr7 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Nov 2025, 23:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-770

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats