CVE-2025-5914VulnerabilityPublished 26 Aug 2025Updated 21 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Insights proxy Container Image

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2025-5914· High 7.8

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High : upgrade Red Hat to 3.8.0 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.8.0

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

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Jun 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 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 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 libarchive to 3.8.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
libarchive	Affected <3.8.0	Fixed in 3.8.0
GitHublibarchive`pkg:github/libarchive`Other threats	Affected <3.8.0	Fixed in 3.8.0

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

AI-suggested

Currently, no official fixes or patches are available for these vulnerabilities. No specific mitigations are provided for the libxml2 vulnerability due to complexity and lack of suitable options meeting Red Hat's criteria.

Description

The Insights proxy Container is used by the Insights proxy product RPM and serves as an intermediary between cystomer systems in disconnected networks, air-gapped systems or systems with no outside connections and Insights. The Insights proxy routes all Red Hat Insights traffic through itself, providing a layer of privary and security for disconnected customer systems.

Impact

The vulnerabilities affect the Red Hat Insights proxy container, which is critical for securely routing Insights traffic from disconnected or air-gapped systems. The libxml2 flaw can lead to out-of-bounds memory access, potentially causing unexpected behavior or integrity issues, but requires local access and complex exploitation conditions. The overall severity is rated high by Red Hat, indicating significant risk to systems relying on the Insights proxy for secure communications. No known exploits are reported in the wild at this time.

Summary

The Red Hat Insights proxy Container Image acts as a proxy for Red Hat Insights traffic from isolated customer systems. It is affected by multiple vulnerabilities, including CVE-2025-5914 and two additional CVEs related to libxml2 (CVE-2025-32414 and CVE-2025-32415). The libxml2 vulnerability involves out-of-bounds memory access due to incorrect handling of return values in xmlPythonFileRead and xmlPythonFileReadRaw functions, caused by a mismatch between byte length and character length in Unicode processing. Exploitation requires local access and specific input conditions, making it complex. No patches or official fixes have been released yet for these vulnerabilities. The advisory recommends applying all previously released errata before updating the Insights proxy container image once fixes are available.

CWE-190Integer Overflow or Wraparound (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.
Requirements
Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-393Return of Wrong Status Code (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
A function or operation returns an incorrect return value or status code that does not indicate the true result of execution, causing the product to modify its behavior based on the incorrect result.
CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
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 · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (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
Overread Buffers (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 16 Aug 2026, 16:56 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-190, CWE-393, CWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats