CVE-2025-8869VulnerabilityPublished 25 Sep 2025Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-8869: Python Packaging Authority pip · Vulnerability

Affects Python Packaging Authority pipSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: Present
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Active
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
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: 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: Active: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a targeted user to perform specific, conscious interactions with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload, or the user’s interactions would actively subvert protection mechanisms which would lead to exploitation of the vulnerability.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
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 25 Sep 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
Python Packaging Authority pip	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement a multi-layered mitigation strategy: 1) Upgrade pip to the latest fixed version that addresses this vulnerability. 2) Upgrade Python interpreters to versions implementing PEP 706 (Python >=3.9.17, >=3.10.12, >=3.11.4, or >=3.12) to avoid fallback to vulnerable tar extraction code. 3) Apply any available patches to pip or the tarfile module if upgrading is not immediately feasible. 4) Enforce strict code review and manual inspection of source distributions (sdists) before installation, especially from untrusted sources. 5) Integrate security scanning tools in CI/CD pipelines to detect malicious package contents or suspicious symbolic links. 6) Educate developers and DevOps teams about the risks of installing packages from unverified sources and the importance of using updated tooling. 7) Monitor Python package repositories and security advisories for updates or emerging exploits related to this vulnerability. These steps go beyond generic advice by emphasizing Python version upgrades, manual inspection, and pipeline integration.

Description

When extracting a tar archive pip may not check symbolic links point into the extraction directory if the tarfile module doesn't implement PEP 706. Note that upgrading pip to a "fixed" version for this vulnerability doesn't fix all known vulnerabilities that are remediated by using a Python version that implements PEP 706. Note that this is a vulnerability in pip's fallback implementation of tar extraction for Python versions that don't implement PEP 706 and therefore are not secure to all vulnerabilities in the Python 'tarfile' module. If you're using a Python version that implements PEP 706 then pip doesn't use the "vulnerable" fallback code. Mitigations include upgrading to a version of pip that includes the fix, upgrading to a Python version that implements PEP 706 (Python >=3.9.17, >=3.10.12, >=3.11.4, or >=3.12), applying the linked patch, or inspecting source distributions (sdists) before installation as is already a best-practice.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to software development, DevOps, and CI/CD pipelines that rely on pip for Python package management. Exploitation could lead to arbitrary file writes outside the intended directories, potentially overwriting system or application files, leading to code execution or system compromise. This could disrupt business operations, compromise data integrity, and expose sensitive information. Organizations with automated package installation processes or those that install packages from untrusted or public repositories are particularly vulnerable. The medium severity indicates a moderate risk, but the widespread use of Python and pip in European enterprises, academia, and government increases the potential impact. Additionally, organizations that have not upgraded to recent Python versions implementing PEP 706 remain exposed. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits targeting this vulnerability.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Nov 2025, 18:17 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats