CVE-2025-43948
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 · uneditedCodemers KLIMS 1.6.DEV allows Python code injection. A user can provide Python code as an input value for a parameter or qualifier (such as for sorting), which will get executed on the server side.
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 confidenceCodemers KLIMS 1.6.DEV contains a Python code injection vulnerability where user-supplied input for parameters or qualifiers (such as sorting operations) is directly evaluated as Python code on the server, allowing authenticated or unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary Python code.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 Codemers KLIMS installation and versionLocate the KLIMS application and check for version indicators such as version files, configuration headers, or the application about page displaying version '1.6.DEV'Affected if The installed version is Codemers KLIMS 1.6.DEV
-
Locate eval or exec usage in parameter handling codeSearch the KLIMS application source code for eval() or exec() function calls, particularly in modules handling qualifiers, sorting operations, or parameter processingAffected if User-supplied parameters or qualifiers are passed directly to eval() or exec() without sanitization
-
Inspect qualifier and parameter input pathwaysReview the request handling code for sorting operations or qualifier inputs to trace whether raw user input reaches evaluation functions without validation checksAffected if The application evaluates user-controllable input for parameters or qualifiers as Python code
-
Confirm accessibility of vulnerable input pointsDetermine whether the parameter/qualifier input endpoints are exposed to unauthenticated users or require only basic authenticationAffected if The vulnerable parameter input is accessible to unauthenticated or loosely authenticated users
A user is affected if running Codemers KLIMS 1.6.DEV where user-supplied input for parameters or qualifiers is directly evaluated via eval/exec without 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 input validation to reject code-like patterns, replace any eval/exec usage with parameterized operations or allowlists for permitted values, and apply the principle of least privilege to the application process.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-43948 — 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-2025-43948 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