VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2025Updated 14 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64739: Zoom Clients · External Control of File Name or Path

Affects Zoom ClientsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:55 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: 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: 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 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 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

AI-suggested

Monitor Zoom Communications Inc. advisories closely and apply security patches immediately once released to address CVE-2025-64739.
Until patches are available, restrict or sanitize inputs related to file paths within Zoom Clients through endpoint security controls or application whitelisting.
Educate users to be cautious about unexpected prompts or file-related interactions during Zoom sessions to reduce risk of user interaction exploitation.
Implement network monitoring to detect unusual file access or data exfiltration patterns originating from Zoom Client processes.
Employ Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions to identify and block unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information.
Review and tighten Zoom Client configuration settings to minimize exposure of file system resources.
Coordinate with IT and security teams to conduct vulnerability scanning and penetration testing focused on Zoom Client deployments.
Consider alternative secure communication platforms temporarily if patching is delayed and risk is deemed unacceptable.
Maintain robust incident response plans to quickly address any exploitation attempts. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on proactive user training, network-level detection, and configuration hardening specific to Zoom Clients.

Description

External control of file name or path in certain Zoom Clients may allow an unauthenticated user to conduct a disclosure of information via network access.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact is the potential unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information through manipulated file paths in Zoom Clients. This could lead to leakage of confidential business communications, personal data, or proprietary information, undermining privacy and compliance with regulations such as GDPR. Sectors like finance, healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure that rely heavily on Zoom for remote collaboration are particularly vulnerable. The medium severity reflects limited impact on system integrity or availability but highlights confidentiality risks that could facilitate further attacks or espionage. The requirement for user interaction reduces the likelihood of automated exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially in targeted phishing or social engineering campaigns. The absence of known exploits currently limits immediate threat but vigilance is necessary as attackers may develop techniques to leverage this vulnerability. Overall, the vulnerability could erode trust in communication security and expose organizations to regulatory penalties if personal data is compromised.

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

zoom.com/en/trust/security-bulletin/zsb-25041 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 15:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-73

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats