CVE-2025-22609
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 · uneditedCoolify is an open-source and self-hostable tool for managing servers, applications, and databases. Prior to version 4.0.0-beta.361, the missing authorization allows any authenticated user to attach any existing private key on a coolify instance to his own server. If the server configuration of IP / domain, port (most likely 22) and user (root) matches with the victim's server configuration, then the attacker can use the `Terminal` feature and execute arbitrary commands on the victim's server. Version 4.0.0-beta.361 fixes the issue.
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 · high confidenceIn Coolify prior to version 4.0.0-beta.361, an IDOR/authorization bypass vulnerability allows any authenticated user to attach any existing private key stored on the Coolify instance to their own server. When the attacker's server configuration (IP/domain, port, user) matches a victim's server configuration, the attacker can use the Terminal feature to execute arbitrary commands on the victim's server with the stolen private key's associated privileges.
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< 4.0.0= 4.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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.
-
Determine installed Coolify versionCheck the Coolify web interface footer, or query the API endpoint /api/version, or run 'coolify --version' from the server CLI if availableAffected if The version is 4.0.0 or any version prior to 4.0.0-beta.361
-
Verify authentication is enabledCheck if user authentication is configured in Coolify by reviewing the authentication settings in the web UI under Settings > Authentication or by checking for created user accountsAffected if At least one user account exists and authentication is enabled, allowing the IDOR vulnerability to be exploited by that user
-
Identify stored private keysNavigate to the Coolify web UI and review Resources > Private Keys to list all private keys stored on the instanceAffected if Any private keys are stored on the Coolify instance, as these could be attached to other servers by an authenticated attacker
-
Review server configurations for configuration overlapList all servers in the Coolify web UI under Resources > Servers and note their IP/domain, port, and user settings to identify any servers with matching or similar configurationsAffected if Multiple servers share identical or very similar IP/domain, port, and user configurations, creating the condition for the attacker's server to match a victim's configuration
-
Check Terminal feature accessVerify if the Terminal feature is available and accessible for servers by checking server details in the Coolify web UIAffected if The Terminal feature is enabled and accessible, as this is the mechanism through which command execution occurs after the private key is stolen
You are affected if Coolify version is 4.0.0 or any version prior to 4.0.0-beta.361, and there is at least one authenticated user with access to private keys and servers with matching configurations.
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 · scoped4.0.0
Upgrade Coolify to version 4.0.0-beta.361 or later to receive the authorization fix.
4.0.0-beta.361 or later
- Upgrade Coolify to version 4.0.0-beta.361 or later to resolve the missing authorization vulnerability
- After upgrading, verify the fix by reviewing that private keys can no longer be attached to servers without proper authorization
- Audit server access logs and terminal session logs for any unauthorized access that may have occurred prior to the upgrade
- If any suspicious activity is detected, revoke potentially compromised SSH keys and regenerate new keys
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-22609 — 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-2025-22609 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