dbcve.org
Code InjectionWeakness · CWE-94

CVE-2025-30055

CRITICAL · 9.0 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-08-27
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The "system" function receives untrusted input from the user. If the "EnableJSCaching" option is enabled, it is possible to execute arbitrary code provided as the "Module" parameter.

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 confidence

The application passes user-supplied input from the 'Module' parameter directly to a 'system()' function call without sanitization. When the 'EnableJSCaching' option is enabled, an attacker can inject arbitrary shell commands through this parameter, achieving remote code execution with the privileges of the running process.

MitigationDisable the 'EnableJSCaching' option if possible as a temporary workaround. The permanent fix requires implementing strict input validation or parameterized execution to prevent command injection before passing any user-controlled input to the system() function.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the affected product and version
    Locate the application binary or service that utilizes the EnableJSCaching option. Run 'version' command or check the application's about/info page to obtain the installed version number.
    Affected if The version falls within the vulnerable range (compare your installed version to the affected ranges documented by the vendor).
  2. Locate the configuration file for EnableJSCaching
    Search for configuration files (e.g., config.json, settings.ini, or similar) that contain the 'EnableJSCaching' parameter. Common paths include /etc/, /opt/, or the application's working directory.
    Affected if EnableJSCaching is set to 'true', 'enabled', or '1'.
  3. Verify the Module parameter handling
    Examine the application's source code or request handling logic that processes the 'Module' parameter. Look for code paths where this parameter is used in system() or similar execution functions without input validation.
    Affected if The Module parameter is passed directly to a system call without sanitization or validation.
  4. Test for injection via Module parameter
    If the web interface or API accepts a Module parameter, send a test request with a benign payload (e.g., 'test; echo vulnerable' or 'test`whoami`') and observe if command execution occurs in the response or logs.
    Affected if The application reflects executed commands or unexpected output indicating command injection is possible.
  5. Review system logs for suspicious system() invocations
    Check application logs, system logs (syslog, auth.log), or web server access/error logs for unusual system() calls, especially those involving the Module parameter or unusual command execution timestamps.
    Affected if Logs show system() calls with unexpected or injectable content in the Module parameter.

You are affected if EnableJSCaching is enabled AND your version is within the vulnerable range AND the Module parameter is processed without sanitization in system calls.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Disable the 'EnableJSCaching' option if possible as a temporary workaround. The permanent fix requires implementing strict input validation or parameterized execution to prevent command injection before passing any user-controlled input to the system() function.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-30055 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-30055 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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