VulnerabilityPublished 13 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-66249: Apache Livy · Path Traversal

Affects Apache LivySource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium : upgrade to 0.9.0-incubating when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.9.0-incubating, 0.9.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: 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: 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 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
Public exploit code: GitHub proofs of concept
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), GitHub proofs of concept, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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 Apache Livy and Apache Software Foundation/org.apache.livy:livy-server to 0.9.0-incubating; org.apache.livy/livy-server to 0.9.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Apache Software FoundationApache Livy	Affected >=0.3.0-incubating <0.9.0-incubating	Fixed in 0.9.0-incubating
MavenApache Software Foundation/org.apache.livy:livy-server`pkg:maven/Apache Software Foundation/org.apache.livy:livy-server`Other threats	Affected >=0.3.0-incubating <0.9.0-incubating	Fixed in 0.9.0-incubating
Mavenorg.apache.livy/livy-server`pkg:maven/org.apache.livy/livy-server`Other threats	Affected <0.9.0	Fixed in 0.9.0

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

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade Apache Livy to version 0.9.0 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. Organizations should audit their Livy server configurations to identify any use of non-default 'livy.file.local-dir-whitelist' settings and revert to default if upgrading is not immediately possible. Additionally, implement strict access controls and network segmentation to limit exposure of Livy servers to trusted users and networks only. Monitoring and logging access to Livy file operations can help detect suspicious activity attempting path traversal. Employing file integrity monitoring on critical files can alert administrators to unauthorized access or changes. Finally, ensure that sensitive data on Livy servers is encrypted at rest and that least privilege principles are applied to service accounts to minimize damage if a breach occurs.

Description

Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in Apache Livy. This issue affects Apache Livy: from 0.3.0 before 0.9.0. The vulnerability can only be exploited with non-default Apache Livy Server settings. If the configuration value "livy.file.local-dir-whitelist" is set to a non-default value, the directory checking can be bypassed. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 0.9.0, which fixes the issue.

Impact

If exploited, this vulnerability could allow attackers to read arbitrary files on the server running Apache Livy, potentially exposing sensitive configuration files, credentials, or other critical data. This unauthorized access compromises confidentiality and could lead to further attacks such as privilege escalation or lateral movement within an organization's network. The impact is somewhat mitigated by the requirement for non-default configuration, which reduces the number of vulnerable deployments. However, organizations that customize the 'livy.file.local-dir-whitelist' setting are at risk. Since Apache Livy is commonly used in big data and analytics environments, exposure of sensitive data could have significant operational and compliance consequences. The vulnerability does not appear to allow remote code execution or denial of service directly, but the confidentiality breach alone can be critical depending on the data accessed. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits targeting misconfigured Livy servers.

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (Path Traversal) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
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…
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (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 13 Mar 2026, 15:44 UTC

Public exploits and detectionGitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats