Uncontrolled Resource ConsumptionWeakness · CWE-400

CVE-2025-30188

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-31
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable 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
Malicious or unintentional API requests can be used to add significant amount of data to caches. Caches may evict information that is required to operate the web frontend, which leads to unavailability of the component. Please deploy the provided updates and patch releases. No publicly available exploits are known

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

This is a cache-based denial of service vulnerability where malicious or unintentional API requests can flood caches with data, causing eviction of critical information needed for the web frontend to operate. The attack exploits insufficient cache size limits or improper cache key management, leading to component unavailability.

MitigationDeploy the provided patch releases and updates. Additionally, implement proper cache size limits, rate limiting on API endpoints, and cache key isolation to prevent one request type from evicting critical frontend data.

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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 checks

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

  1. Confirm caching is enabled
    Review your application or web server configuration files to determine if any caching mechanism (HTTP caching, API response caching, application-level caching) is active
    Affected if Caching is enabled and no proper cache size limits are configured
  2. Check cache size limit configuration
    Inspect the cache configuration settings for any maximum size, quota, or eviction policy settings. Look for parameters controlling cache memory usage or item counts
    Affected if Cache size limits are absent, set too high, or not enforced
  3. Review cache key isolation
    Examine how cache keys are generated for different request types (e.g., API endpoints, frontend assets, user sessions). Check if different request types share the same cache namespace without proper separation
    Affected if Cache keys do not isolate frontend critical data from high-volume API requests
  4. Inspect cache eviction behavior
    Monitor cache logs or metrics for eviction patterns, particularly if frontend assets or critical data are being evicted frequently while API response caching is active
    Affected if Cache evictions are occurring on critical frontend components due to API request volume
  5. Check API endpoint caching policy
    Review API endpoint configuration to identify which endpoints have caching enabled and what their cache TTL (time-to-live) or storage footprint might be
    Affected if API endpoints are cached with long TTLs or large response sizes without throttling

You are affected if your environment has caching enabled without proper cache size limits or cache key isolation, allowing API requests to evict critical frontend data from the cache.

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

Deploy the provided patch releases and updates. Additionally, implement proper cache size limits, rate limiting on API endpoints, and cache key isolation to prevent one request type from evicting critical frontend data.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-30188 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-30188 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