CVE-2025-49559
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 · uneditedAdobe Commerce versions 2.4.9-alpha1, 2.4.8-p1, 2.4.7-p6, 2.4.6-p11, 2.4.5-p13, 2.4.4-p14 and earlier are affected by an Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability that could result in a security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to modify limited data. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
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 confidenceAdobe Commerce contains a path traversal vulnerability allowing attackers to access restricted directories through specially crafted pathname inputs. This bypasses security controls and enables modification of limited data without requiring user interaction.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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< 2.4.4= 2.4.4= 2.4.5= 2.4.6= 2.4.7= 2.4.8< 2.4.5= 2.4.5= 2.4.6= 2.4.7= 2.4.8= 2.4.9< 1.3.3= 1.3.3= 1.3.4= 1.3.5= 1.4.2= 1.5.2= 1.5.3CVSS 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
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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 installed Adobe Commerce or Magento versionRun the command 'php bin/magento --version' from the Magento root directory, or check the version file at app/etc/di.xml or composer.jsonAffected if The version falls within any of these ranges: Adobe Commerce < 2.4.4, 2.4.4 through 2.4.8; Magento Open Source < 2.4.5, 2.4.5 through 2.4.9
-
Identify Adobe Commerce B2B module versionRun 'php bin/magento module:status Magento_B2b' to check if B2B is enabled, then check the version in composer.json or in the module's registration.php file under vendor/magento/module-b2bAffected if B2B module version is < 1.3.3, or equals 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.2, 1.5.2, or 1.5.3
-
Verify file operation endpoints are accessibleReview web server access logs and Magento debug logs (var/log/exception.log, var/log/system.log) for requests containing path traversal patterns such as '../', '..\', or encoded variants in file-related parametersAffected if Unusual or unauthorized path traversal patterns appear in request logs for file handling functionality
-
Check for unauthorized file modificationsCompare current files in the var/ directory and media/ directory against known-good baselines or recent backups to detect unexpected changesAffected if Files exist outside expected directories or unauthorized modifications are present in restricted paths
The environment is affected if the installed Adobe Commerce, Magento Open Source, or B2B module version matches any of the affected version ranges listed, and the system handles file path inputs without sufficient 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.
dbcve · scoped1.3.32.4.42.4.5
Apply the official Adobe Commerce security patches for the affected versions (2.4.4-p14, 2.4.5-p13, 2.4.6-p11, 2.4.7-p6, 2.4.8-p1, 2.4.9-alpha1). Review file access controls and implement additional input validation on file path operations as a defense-in-depth measure.
Upgrade to latest patch release (2.4.4-p14+, 2.4.5-p13+, 2.4.6-p11+, 2.4.7-p6+, 2.4.8-p1+) or to stable release 2.4.9+
- 1. Identify the currently installed Adobe Commerce/Magento version by running: bin/magento --version
- 2. Review the Adobe Commerce software lifecycle policy to determine which release line to upgrade to based on your support requirements
- 3. Create a full backup of the production database and files before proceeding with any upgrade
- 4. Test the upgrade in a staging environment first to verify compatibility with custom code and extensions
- 5. For Commerce/ Magento 2.4.4.x: upgrade to version 2.4.4-p14 or later
- 6. For Commerce/ Magento 2.4.5.x: upgrade to version 2.4.5-p13 or later
- 7. For Commerce/ Magento 2.4.6.x: upgrade to version 2.4.6-p11 or later
- 8. For Commerce/ Magento 2.4.7.x: upgrade to version 2.4.7-p6 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49559 — 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-2025-49559 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