9.8 CVE-2025-3248

CISA Kev Catalog CSRF Patch Exploit

Langflow versions prior to 1.3.0 are susceptible to code injection in the /api/v1/validate/code endpoint. A remote and unauthenticated attacker can send crafted HTTP requests to execute arbitrary code.
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-3248

Categories

CWE-306 : Missing Authentication for Critical Function
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources. For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server. When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to require strong authentication for users who should be allowed to access the data [REF-1297] [REF-1298] [REF-1302]. File-sharing PHP product does not check if user is logged in during requests for PHP library files under an includes/ directory, allowing configuration changes, code execution, and other impacts. Chain: a digital asset management program has an undisclosed backdoor in the legacy version of a PHP script (CWE-912) that could allow an unauthenticated user to export metadata (CWE-306) TCP-based protocol in Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) has no authentication. Condition Monitor firmware uses a protocol that does not require authentication. SCADA-based protocol for bridging WAN and LAN traffic has no authentication. Safety Instrumented System uses proprietary TCP protocols with no authentication. Distributed Control System (DCS) uses a protocol that has no authentication. Chain: Cloud computing virtualization platform does not require authentication for upload of a tar format file (CWE-306), then uses .. path traversal sequences (CWE-23) in the file to access unexpected files, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. Bluetooth speaker does not require authentication for the debug functionality on the UART port, allowing root shell access WiFi router does not require authentication for its UART port, allowing adversaries with physical access to execute commands as root IT management product does not perform authentication for some REST API requests, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. Default setting in workflow management product allows all API requests without authentication, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. MFV. Access TFTP server without authentication and obtain configuration file with sensitive plaintext information. Agent software running at privileges does not authenticate incoming requests over an unprotected channel, allowing a Shatter" attack. Product enforces restrictions through a GUI but not through privileged APIs. monitor device allows access to physical UART debug port without authentication Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) does not have an authentication feature on its communication protocols.

CWE-94 : Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Automated static analysis, commonly referred to as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), can find some instances of this weakness by analyzing source code (or binary/compiled code) without having to execute it. Typically, this is done by building a model of data flow and control flow, then searching for potentially-vulnerable patterns that connect "sources" (origins of input) with "sinks" (destinations where the data interacts with external components, a lower layer such as the OS, etc.) Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code. Use automated static analysis tools that target this type of weakness. Many modern techniques use data flow analysis to minimize the number of false positives. This is not a perfect solution, since 100% accuracy and coverage are not feasible. Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results. Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184). Run the code in an environment that performs automatic taint propagation and prevents any command execution that uses tainted variables, such as Perl's "-T" switch. This will force the program to perform validation steps that remove the taint, although you must be careful to correctly validate your inputs so that you do not accidentally mark dangerous inputs as untainted (see CWE-183 and CWE-184). Math component in an LLM framework translates user input into a Pythonexpression that is input into the Python exec() method, allowing codeexecution - one variant of a "prompt injection" attack. Python-based library uses an LLM prompt containing user input todynamically generate code that is then fed as input into the Pythonexec() method, allowing code execution - one variant of a "promptinjection" attack. Framework for LLM applications allows eval injection via a crafted response from a hosting provider. Python compiler uses eval() to execute malicious strings as Python code. Chain: regex in EXIF processor code does not correctly determine where a string ends (CWE-625), enabling eval injection (CWE-95), as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. "Code injection" in VPN product, as exploited in the wild per CISA KEV. Eval injection in PHP program. Eval injection in Perl program. Eval injection in Perl program using an ID that should only contain hyphens and numbers. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. Eval injection in Perl program. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. Direct code injection into Perl eval function. MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. MFV. code injection into PHP eval statement using nested constructs that should not be nested. Code injection into Python eval statement from a field in a formatted file. Eval injection in Python program. chain: Resultant eval injection. An invalid value prevents initialization of variables, which can be modified by attacker and later injected into PHP eval statement. Perl code directly injected into CGI library file from parameters to another CGI program. Direct PHP code injection into supporting template file. Direct code injection into PHP script that can be accessed by attacker. PHP code from User-Agent HTTP header directly inserted into log file implemented as PHP script.

References

disclosure@vulncheck.com Patch Exploit

https://github.com/langflow-ai/langflow/pull/6911 Patch
https://github.com/langflow-ai/langflow/releases/tag/1.3.0 Release Notes
https://www.horizon3.ai/attack-research/disclosures/unsafe-at-any-speed-abusi... Exploit Third Party Advisory

CPE

cpe	start	end
Configuration 1
cpe:2.3:a:langflow:langflow::::::::		< 1.3.0

REMEDIATION

Patch

Url
https://github.com/langflow-ai/langflow/pull/6911

EXPLOITS

Exploit-db.com

id	description	date
No known exploits

POC Github

Url
https://github.com/PuddinCat/CVE-2025-3248-POC
https://github.com/verylazytech/CVE-2025-3248

Other Nist (github, ...)

Url
https://www.horizon3.ai/attack-research/disclosures/unsafe-at-any-speed-abusi...

CAPEC

Common Attack Pattern Enumerations and Classifications

id	description	severity
12	Choosing Message Identifier This pattern of attack is defined by the selection of messages distributed via multicast or public information channels that are intended for another client by determining the parameter value assigned to that client. This attack allows the adversary to gain access to potentially privileged information, and to possibly perpetrate other attacks through the distribution means by impersonation. If the channel/message being manipulated is an input rather than output mechanism for the system, (such as a command bus), this style of attack could be used to change the adversary's identifier to more a privileged one. [Determine Nature of Messages] Determine the nature of messages being transported as well as the identifiers to be used as part of the attack [Authenticate] If required, authenticate to the distribution channel [Identify Known Client Identifiers] If any particular client's information is available through a control channel available to all users, the adversary will discover particular identifiers for targeted clients by observing this channel, or requesting client information through this channel. [Change Message Identifier] Adversaries with client access connecting to output channels could change their channel identifier and see someone else's (perhaps more privileged) data.	High
166	Force the System to Reset Values An attacker forces the target into a previous state in order to leverage potential weaknesses in the target dependent upon a prior configuration or state-dependent factors. Even in cases where an attacker may not be able to directly control the configuration of the targeted application, they may be able to reset the configuration to a prior state since many applications implement reset functions.	Medium
216	Communication Channel Manipulation An adversary manipulates a setting or parameter on communications channel in order to compromise its security. This can result in information exposure, insertion/removal of information from the communications stream, and/or potentially system compromise.
36	Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality An adversary searches for and invokes interfaces or functionality that the target system designers did not intend to be publicly available. If interfaces fail to authenticate requests, the attacker may be able to invoke functionality they are not authorized for. [Identify services] Discover a service of interest by exploring service registry listings or by connecting on a known port or some similar means. [Authenticate to service] Authenticate to the service, if required, in order to explore it. [Identify all interfaces] Determine the exposed interfaces by querying the registry as well as probably sniffing to expose interfaces that are not explicitly listed. [Attempt to discover unpublished functions] Using manual or automated means, discover unpublished or undocumented functions exposed by the service. [Exploit unpublished functions] Using information determined via experimentation, exploit the unpublished features of the service.	High
62	Cross Site Request Forgery An attacker crafts malicious web links and distributes them (via web pages, email, etc.), typically in a targeted manner, hoping to induce users to click on the link and execute the malicious action against some third-party application. If successful, the action embedded in the malicious link will be processed and accepted by the targeted application with the users' privilege level. This type of attack leverages the persistence and implicit trust placed in user session cookies by many web applications today. In such an architecture, once the user authenticates to an application and a session cookie is created on the user's system, all following transactions for that session are authenticated using that cookie including potential actions initiated by an attacker and simply "riding" the existing session cookie. [Explore target website] The attacker first explores the target website to determine pieces of functionality that are of interest to them (e.g. money transfers). The attacker will need a legitimate user account on the target website. It would help to have two accounts. [Create a link that when clicked on, will execute the interesting functionality.] The attacker needs to create a link that will execute some interesting functionality such as transfer money, change a password, etc. [Convince user to click on link] Finally, the attacker needs to convince a user that is logged into the target website to click on a link to execute the CSRF attack.	Very High
242	Code Injection An adversary exploits a weakness in input validation on the target to inject new code into that which is currently executing. This differs from code inclusion in that code inclusion involves the addition or replacement of a reference to a code file, which is subsequently loaded by the target and used as part of the code of some application.	High
35	Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files. When the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high.	Very High
77	Manipulating User-Controlled Variables This attack targets user controlled variables (DEBUG=1, PHP Globals, and So Forth). An adversary can override variables leveraging user-supplied, untrusted query variables directly used on the application server without any data sanitization. In extreme cases, the adversary can change variables controlling the business logic of the application. For instance, in languages like PHP, a number of poorly set default configurations may allow the user to override variables. [Probe target application] The adversary first probes the target application to determine important information about the target. This information could include types software used, software versions, what user input the application consumes, and so on. [Find user-controlled variables] Using the information found by probing the application, the adversary attempts to manipulate many user-controlled variables and observes the effects on the application. If the adversary notices any significant changes to the application, they will know that a certain variable is useful to the application. [Manipulate user-controlled variables] Once the adversary has found a user-controller variable(s) that is important to the application, they will manipulate it to change the normal behavior in a way that benefits the adversary.	Very High

MITRE

Techniques

id	description
T1027.006	Obfuscated Files or Information: HTML Smuggling
T1027.009	Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded Payloads
T1564.009	Hide Artifacts: Resource Forking
© 2022 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation.

Mitigations

id	description
M1048	Browser sandboxes can be used to mitigate some of the impact of exploitation, but sandbox escapes may still exist.
M1040	On Windows 10, enable Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) rules to prevent execution of potentially obfuscated scripts.
M1013	Configure applications to use the application bundle structure which leverages the <code>/Resources</code> folder location.
© 2022 The MITRE Corporation. Esta obra se reproduce y distribuye con el permiso de The MITRE Corporation.

Cybersecurity needs ?

Strengthen software security from the outset with our DevSecOps expertise

Integrate security right from the start of the software development cycle for more robust applications and greater customer confidence.
Our team of DevSecOps experts can help you secure your APIs, data pipelines, CI/CD chains, Docker containers and Kubernetes deployments.

Discover this offer

Soutenez No Hack Me sur Tipeee