VulnerabilityPublished 28 Jan 2026Updated 29 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-71003: oneflow · CVE-2025-71003 is a high-severity input validation

Affects oneflowSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 35% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: 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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 28 Jan 2026
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHuboneflow-inc/oneflow`pkg:github/oneflow-inc/oneflow`Other threats	Affected =0.9.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-71003, European organizations should first restrict network access to OneFlow services, ensuring they are not exposed to untrusted networks or the internet. Implement strict firewall rules and network segmentation to limit potential attack vectors. Employ input validation and sanitization at application and network layers to detect and block malformed requests targeting flow.arange(). Monitor logs and system behavior for anomalies indicative of exploitation attempts, such as unusual input patterns or service crashes. Until an official patch is released, consider deploying runtime application self-protection (RASP) or web application firewalls (WAF) with custom rules to detect and prevent exploitation attempts. Engage with OneFlow maintainers and subscribe to security advisories for timely patch updates. Additionally, conduct regular backups and have incident response plans ready to restore services quickly if a DoS occurs. For critical environments, consider temporary migration to alternative frameworks or versions not affected by this vulnerability.

Description

CVE-2025-71003 is a high-severity input validation vulnerability in the flow.arange() component of OneFlow v0.9.0 that allows remote attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) without authentication or user interaction. The flaw arises from improper input validation, enabling crafted inputs to crash or hang the application, impacting availability. There are no known exploits in the wild yet, and no patches have been published. European organizations using OneFlow for machine learning or data processing workloads could face service disruptions if targeted. Mitigation involves restricting access to OneFlow services, input sanitization, and monitoring for anomalous usage patterns. Countries with significant AI and data science sectors, such as Germany, France, and the UK, are more likely to be affected due to higher adoption rates of such frameworks. The vulnerability has a CVSS score of 7.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-71003 is the potential disruption of machine learning and data processing services that rely on OneFlow. This can lead to downtime, loss of productivity, and delays in AI-driven projects or services. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, automotive, and research that leverage AI frameworks may experience operational interruptions. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or integrity, data breaches or manipulation are unlikely; however, availability loss can still cause cascading effects, especially in real-time or critical systems. The ease of exploitation without authentication means attackers can target exposed OneFlow instances remotely, increasing the risk of widespread DoS attacks. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the high CVSS score indicates that once exploited, the impact could be severe. European entities with public-facing AI services or cloud deployments running OneFlow are particularly at risk.

Summary

CVE-2025-71003 identifies a critical input validation vulnerability in the flow.arange() function of OneFlow version 0.9.0, a machine learning framework. The vulnerability stems from insufficient validation of input parameters, which allows an attacker to supply specially crafted inputs that cause the function to malfunction, leading to Denial of Service (DoS). This DoS condition can manifest as application crashes or resource exhaustion, rendering the affected service unavailable. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable over the network without requiring any authentication or user interaction, increasing its risk profile. The Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) associated is CWE-20, indicating improper input validation. The CVSS v3.1 base score is 7.5, with vector AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H, highlighting that the attack can be launched remotely with low complexity, no privileges, and no user interaction, impacting only availability. No patches or fixes have been released yet, and there are no known exploits in the wild. OneFlow is used primarily in AI and data science environments, so the vulnerability could disrupt critical machine learning workflows. The lack of confidentiality or integrity impact confines the damage to availability, but this can still cause significant operational disruption in production environments.

CWE-20Improper Input Validation (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #18OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of…
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (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 5 Feb 2026, 08:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-20

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats