CVE-2025-8344VulnerabilityPublished 31 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-8344: openviglet shio · Unrestricted Upload

Affects openviglet shioSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
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: 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: 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to 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 31 Jul 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 2026-10-25.

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
openviglet shio	Affected =0.3.0 =0.3.1 =0.3.2 =0.3.3 =0.3.4 =0.3.5 =0.3.6 =0.3.7 =0.3.8	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include restricting access to the file upload functionality by implementing network-level controls such as IP whitelisting or VPN access to limit exposure. 2. Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious file upload attempts, especially those manipulating the filename parameter. 3. Implement strict server-side validation and sanitization of all file upload inputs, including filename normalization and rejection of unexpected file types or extensions. 4. Disable or restrict file upload features if not essential to the application’s functionality until a patch is available. 5. Monitor server logs for unusual upload activity or unexpected file creations in web-accessible directories. 6. Segregate the upload directory from executable paths to prevent uploaded files from being executed as code. 7. Keep the openviglet shio product updated and apply vendor patches promptly once released. 8. Conduct penetration testing focused on file upload mechanisms to identify residual risks. 9. Educate development and operations teams about secure file handling practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities in the future.

Description

A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in openviglet shio up to 0.3.8. Affected is the function shStaticFileUpload of the file shio-app/src/main/java/com/viglet/shio/api/staticfile/ShStaticFileAPI.java. The manipulation of the argument filename leads to unrestricted upload. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations using openviglet shio versions up to 0.3.8, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to web application security. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to upload malicious files, potentially leading to server compromise, data breaches, or service disruption. This could impact confidentiality by exposing sensitive data, integrity by modifying or replacing legitimate files, and availability by deploying disruptive payloads such as ransomware or defacement scripts. Organizations in sectors with strict data protection regulations, such as finance, healthcare, and government, could face regulatory penalties and reputational damage if exploited. The medium CVSS score suggests moderate impact, but the ease of exploitation and remote attack vector elevate the threat level. Since no patches are currently available, organizations may face a window of exposure. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for opportunistic attacks, especially as proof-of-concept code may become available following public disclosure. European entities with internet-facing shio instances should prioritize risk assessment and mitigation to prevent exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Jul 2025, 02:02 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats