CVE-2025-31554
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 · uneditedImproper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in docxpresso Docxpresso docxpresso allows Absolute Path Traversal.This issue affects Docxpresso: from n/a through <= 2.6.
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 confidenceAbsolute Path Traversal vulnerability in docxpresso Docxpresso allows attackers to access files outside restricted directories by manipulating file path inputs with absolute paths. This could enable unauthorized read access to sensitive filesystem locations.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 docxpresso installation and versionSearch for docxpresso files in common web application directories (e.g., /var/www/, /home/*/public_html/, C:\inetpub\wwwroot\). Look for composer.json, package.json, or version files within the docxpresso directory structure.Affected if docxpresso is installed and the installed version is lower than the fixed version (if known) or any version if version info is unavailable.
-
Locate file handling endpoints or functionsSearch the docxpresso codebase for file read/download functions. Look for patterns like file_get_contents, fopen, readfile, or similar PHP file functions that accept user input. Check API routes or controller files for file-related operations.Affected if File handling code exists that accepts user-supplied input as file paths without sufficient validation.
-
Inspect input validation on file path parametersExamine the code handling file path inputs. Look for how the application processes file path parameters - whether it validates, sanitizes, or normalizes paths before use.Affected if File path parameters accept absolute paths (e.g., starting with / or C:\) without rejection or proper path containment validation.
-
Check for path traversal safeguardsSearch for path validation logic in file handling code. Look for checks using basename(), realpath(), or explicit rejection of '..' sequences or absolute path prefixes.Affected if No path validation exists, or validation can be bypassed (e.g., basename() alone does not prevent absolute path traversal).
-
Test if absolute paths bypass restrictionsIf you have access to test the functionality, observe whether supplying an absolute path (e.g., /etc/passwd or C:\Windows\win.ini) as a file parameter returns the file contents or triggers an error.Affected if Supplying an absolute path to a file parameter successfully reads files outside the intended directory.
The environment is affected if docxpresso is installed and exposes file read functionality that accepts absolute path input without proper path containment validation.
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 dataImplement strict path validation to ensure user-supplied file paths resolve within intended directories. Use basename() normalization and reject any path containing '..' or absolute path prefixes.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31554 — 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-2025-31554 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