CVE-2025-49879
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 themezaa Litho litho allows Path Traversal.This issue affects Litho: from n/a through <= 3.0.
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 confidenceA path traversal vulnerability exists in the Litho theme (version <= 3.0) that allows attackers to access files outside the intended web root directory through manipulation of file path inputs. This improper limitation of pathname to a restricted directory could enable unauthorized file access.
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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Litho theme installationLocate the Litho theme files in the web application's theme or template directory. Common locations include: /themes/litho, /wp-content/themes/litho (if WordPress), or the application's theme folder. Search for files named 'litho' or containing 'litho' in the theme directory.Affected if Litho theme files are found in the web application
-
Determine Litho theme versionOpen the theme's main configuration file (such as style.css, theme.json, or package.json in the Litho theme directory) and locate the version field. Compare the version number to 3.0.Affected if The installed version is 3.0 or lower
-
Identify file path input functionalitySearch the Litho theme source code for functions that handle file path parameters, such as file inclusion, template loading, or asset retrieval. Look for code patterns that accept user-supplied paths (e.g., $_GET, $_POST, or request parameters) and use them in file operations like include, require, fopen, or file_get_contents.Affected if Code exists that accepts file path parameters from user input without proper validation
-
Verify input validation on path parametersExamine the code handling file paths for sanitization routines. Check if paths are validated against a restricted directory, canonicalized using realpath(), or if path traversal sequences (..) are stripped or blocked.Affected if No input validation or sanitization is found on file path parameters, or validation can be bypassed
-
Test for path traversal accessibilityIf the file path input is accessible via web request, attempt to access a known file outside the web root using path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../etc/passwd or ..\..\windows\system32\config\sam). Observe if the file contents are returned.Affected if The application returns contents of files outside the intended directory
A system is affected if the Litho theme version is 3.0 or lower AND the file path input feature is exposed and lacks proper input validation to prevent directory traversal.
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 and sanitization for all file path parameters, ensuring paths are canonicalized and constrained to allowed directories before use.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49879 — 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-2025-49879 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