CVE-2025-1300
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCodeChecker is an analyzer tooling, defect database and viewer extension for the Clang Static Analyzer and Clang Tidy. The CodeChecker web server contains an open redirect vulnerability due to missing protections against multiple slashes after the product name in the URL. This results in bypassing the protections against CVE-2021-28861, leading to the same open redirect pathway. This issue affects CodeChecker: through 6.24.5.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceCodeChecker web server has an open redirect vulnerability where multiple slashes after the product name in the URL bypass existing protections (originally meant to address CVE-2021-28861). The missing input validation on path normalization allows attackers to craft malicious URLs that redirect users to arbitrary external sites.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 6.24.6CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify CodeChecker versionRun 'codechecker --version' or check the package manager for the installed CodeChecker versionAffected if The version is lower than 6.24.6
-
Confirm CodeChecker web server is runningCheck if the CodeChecker web server process is active and listening on its configured port (typically 8001 or as set in configuration)Affected if The web server is exposed and running with a vulnerable version
-
Test redirect with multiple slashesAccess a URL with the pattern 'https://[host]:[port]//[anything]' or 'https://[host]:[port]/codechecker//[anything]' where the double slash appears after the base pathAffected if The server allows the request and performs a redirect to an external site (verify by observing the Location header in the response)
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.24.6
Implement strict URL path normalization that collapses multiple consecutive slashes and re-validate all redirect targets against an allowlist or ensure the redirect target is a relative path within the application.
6.24.6
- Upgrade CodeChecker to version 6.24.6 or later
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed version
- Test that the open redirect vulnerability is resolved by attempting to access URLs with multiple slashes
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-1300 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-1300 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data