CVE-2025-14406
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 · uneditedSoda PDF Desktop Uncontrolled Search Path Element Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows local attackers to escalate privileges on affected installations of Soda PDF Desktop. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the configuration of OpenSSL. The product loads an OpenSSL configuration file from an unsecured location. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code in the context of SYSTEM. Was ZDI-CAN-25793.
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 confidenceSoda PDF Desktop loads an OpenSSL configuration file from an unsecured, attacker-controllable location (likely the application working directory or a world-writable path). A local attacker with low-privileged code execution can place a malicious OpenSSL config file in this location, causing the application to load it and execute arbitrary code in SYSTEM context during startup or when the PDF functionality triggers OpenSSL initialization.
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= 14.0.509.23030CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 installed Soda PDF Desktop versionOpen Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features, locate Soda PDF Desktop, and check the Version column; or run 'Get-ItemProperty HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\* | Where-Object {$_.DisplayName -like "*Soda*PDF*"} | Select-Object DisplayName, DisplayVersion' in PowerShellAffected if The displayed version is exactly 14.0.509.23030
-
Check application directory permissionsRight-click the Soda PDF installation folder (typically C:\Program Files\Soda PDF or C:\Program Files (x86)\Soda PDF), select Properties > Security, and verify that standard users or low-privileged accounts do not have Write or Modify permissionsAffected if Standard users or low-privileged accounts have Write or Modify permissions to the application directory, allowing them to place a malicious openssl.cnf file
-
Verify OpenSSL config file presence in application directoryNavigate to the Soda PDF installation folder and search for any openssl.cnf, openssl.cfg, or similar OpenSSL configuration files present in that locationAffected if An OpenSSL configuration file exists in the application directory, which the vulnerable version would load from this unsecured location
-
Check working directory write accessLaunch Soda PDF Desktop, note the process working directory (visible in Process Explorer or Task Manager > Details > Working Set), then verify if standard users can write files to that locationAffected if The working directory used by Soda PDF is writable by low-privileged users, allowing config injection
-
Audit user group permissions on application folderRun 'icacls "C:\Program Files\Soda PDF"' (adjust path if different) and review the output to identify which accounts or groups have (I) (F) or (M) permissionsAffected if Users other than Administrators and SYSTEM have inheritance (I) with Full (F) or Modify (M) access to the application folder
A user is affected if they have Soda PDF Desktop version 14.0.509.230230 installed AND the application directory or its working directory is writable by low-privileged users, enabling an attacker to place a malicious OpenSSL config file for code execution in SYSTEM context.
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.
From vendor dataRestrict write permissions on directories where Soda PDF Desktop loads the OpenSSL config (typically the application directory or working directory); update to vendor patch when available; avoid running the application from writable network shares or temp directories.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,592.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-14406 — 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-2025-14406 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