CVE-2025-24964
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 · uneditedVitest is a testing framework powered by Vite. Affected versions are subject to arbitrary remote Code Execution when accessing a malicious website while Vitest API server is listening by Cross-site WebSocket hijacking (CSWSH) attacks. When `api` option is enabled (Vitest UI enables it), Vitest starts a WebSocket server. This WebSocket server did not check Origin header and did not have any authorization mechanism and was vulnerable to CSWSH attacks. This WebSocket server has `saveTestFile` API that can edit a test file and `rerun` API that can rerun the tests. An attacker can execute arbitrary code by injecting a code in a test file by the `saveTestFile` API and then running that file by calling the `rerun` API. This vulnerability can result in remote code execution for users that are using Vitest serve API. This issue has been patched in versions 1.6.1, 2.1.9 and 3.0.5. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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<= 0.0.125>= 1.0.0, < 1.6.1>= 2.0.0, < 2.1.9>= 3.0.0, < 3.0.5CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 · scoped1.6.12.1.93.0.5
Upgrade to version 1.6.1 (for 1.x), 2.1.9 (for 2.x), or 3.0.5 (for 3.x) - choose the appropriate version based on your current major version
- 1. Identify the current Vitest version in your project by checking package.json or running `npm list vitest`
- 2. Determine which major version branch you are on (0.x, 1.x, 2.x, or 3.x)
- 3. For 0.x versions: Upgrade to at least version 1.6.1 or migrate to a supported major version
- 4. For 1.x versions: Upgrade to version 1.6.1 by running `npm install [email protected]` or `yarn add [email protected]`
- 5. For 2.x versions: Upgrade to version 2.1.9 by running `npm install [email protected]` or `yarn add [email protected]`
- 6. For 3.x versions: Upgrade to version 3.0.5 by running `npm install [email protected]` or `yarn add [email protected]`
- 7. After upgrading, verify the installation by running `npm list vitest` to confirm the correct version is installed
- 8. Test your test suite to ensure functionality is preserved after the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-24964 — 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-2025-24964 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