VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2025Updated 2 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-6705: Eclipse Open VSX Registry · Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources

Affects Eclipse Open VSX RegistrySource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High.

Data as of 8 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.6High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 8 Nov 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, affected organizations and users should immediately update OpenVSX to the fixed version released on or after June 24, 2025. Beyond patching, it is critical to implement strict sandboxing and isolation controls for CI job executions to prevent arbitrary code execution. Organizations operating their own OpenVSX instances should audit their CI pipelines to ensure build scripts run with least privilege and in isolated environments. Access controls should be tightened to restrict who can publish or modify extensions, and multi-factor authentication should be enforced for service accounts. Monitoring and logging of CI job activities should be enhanced to detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations should review and validate extensions before installation, employing code signing and integrity verification mechanisms to reduce risk from compromised extensions. Finally, security awareness training for developers on supply chain risks is recommended.

Description

A vulnerability in the Eclipse Open VSX Registry’s automated publishing system could have allowed unauthorized uploads of extensions. Specifically, the system’s build scripts were executed without proper isolation, potentially exposing a privileged token. This token enabled the publishing of new extension versions under any namespace, including those not controlled by an attacker. However, it did not permit deletion of existing extensions, overwriting of published versions, or access to administrative features of the registry. The issue was reported on May 4, 2025, fully resolved by June 24, and followed by a comprehensive audit. No evidence of compromise was found, though 81 extensions were proactively deactivated as a precaution. The standard publishing process remained unaffected. Recommendations have been issued to mitigate similar risks in the future.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability is significant, especially for software developers, enterprises, and organizations relying on OpenVSX for extension management and distribution. Compromise of the OpenVSX marketplace service account could lead to unauthorized publication of malicious extensions, which may be downloaded and installed by developers and organizations, potentially leading to widespread supply chain attacks. This could result in data breaches, intellectual property theft, insertion of backdoors, or disruption of development workflows. Additionally, organizations that integrate OpenVSX extensions into their CI/CD pipelines or development environments may face integrity and availability risks. The vulnerability undermines trust in the extension ecosystem and could have cascading effects on software supply chains across Europe, particularly in sectors with high reliance on open-source tooling such as finance, telecommunications, and government agencies.

Summary

CVE-2025-6705 is a high-severity vulnerability affecting the Eclipse Foundation's OpenVSX marketplace platform, specifically versions prior to June 24, 2025. The vulnerability stems from improper control of dynamically-managed code resources (CWE-913) and relates to missing sandboxing in the continuous integration (CI) job runs responsible for auto-publishing extensions on open-vsx.org. Because the CI jobs that build and publish extensions were not properly sandboxed, an attacker who had access to an existing extension could inject and execute arbitrary build scripts. This capability allows the attacker to escalate privileges by taking over the service account used by the marketplace, effectively gaining control over the OpenVSX publishing infrastructure. The vulnerability does not require user interaction and can be exploited remotely over the network with low attack complexity, though it requires some privileges (access to an existing extension). The CVSS 4.0 score of 7.6 reflects the high confidentiality and integrity impact due to potential full compromise of the marketplace service account, which could lead to malicious extension publication or disruption of the marketplace. The vulnerability was publicly disclosed shortly after being fixed on June 24, 2025, and no known exploits have been reported in the wild as of the publication date. The root cause is the lack of sandboxing in the CI pipeline, allowing untrusted code execution during extension publishing.

CWE-913Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2021: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly restrict reading from or writing to dynamically-managed code resources such as variables, objects, classes, attributes, functions, or executable instructions or statements.
Implementation · Input Validation
For any externally-influenced input, check the input against an allowlist of acceptable values.
Implementation · Architecture and Design · Refactoring
Refactor the code so that it does not need to be dynamically managed.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-653Improper Isolation or Compartmentalization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly compartmentalize or isolate functionality, processes, or resources that require different privilege levels, rights, or permissions.
Architecture and Design
Break up privileges between different modules, objects, or entities. Minimize the interfaces between modules and require strong access control between them.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Jun 2025, 15:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-913, CWE-653

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats