CVE-2025-6492VulnerabilityPublished 22 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6492: MarkText · ReDoS

Affects MarkTextSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

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

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · 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 22 Jun 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubmarktext/marktext`pkg:github/marktext/marktext`Other threats	Affected =0.17.0 =0.17.1	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. Immediate mitigation involves restricting the use of MarkText versions 0.17.0 and 0.17.1 until a patched version is released. Organizations should monitor official MarkText repositories and security advisories for updates addressing this vulnerability. 2. Implement endpoint protection measures that can detect and block anomalous CPU usage patterns indicative of ReDoS attacks. 3. Educate users to avoid opening untrusted or unsolicited Markdown files, especially from external sources or email attachments. 4. Employ network-level controls such as sandboxing or content disarm and reconstruction (CDR) for documents entering the organization to prevent malicious Markdown content from reaching end users. 5. Where feasible, consider alternative Markdown editors with a proven security track record until the vulnerability is resolved. 6. Incorporate regular expression complexity analysis tools in the development lifecycle if internally developing or customizing Markdown processing utilities to prevent similar issues.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in MarkText up to 0.17.1 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function getRecommendTitleFromMarkdownString of the file marktext/src/main/utils/index.js. The manipulation leads to inefficient regular expression complexity. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-6492 is primarily related to availability disruptions on endpoints where MarkText is used. While MarkText is not typically deployed as a server-side application, its use in professional environments for documentation or note-taking means that targeted ReDoS attacks could disrupt workflows or cause temporary denial of service on user machines. This could be exploited in spear-phishing campaigns delivering malicious Markdown files, leading to productivity loss or potential escalation if combined with other vulnerabilities. However, the absence of confidentiality or integrity impact limits the risk of data breaches directly from this vulnerability. Organizations relying heavily on MarkText for collaborative documentation or software development notes might experience localized disruptions. The medium severity rating indicates that while the vulnerability is non-trivial, it does not pose a critical threat to enterprise-wide operations or sensitive data. Nonetheless, the remote exploitability and lack of required privileges make it a concern for endpoint security teams.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…