SscmsApplication

CVE-2025-52237

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-08-05
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
74/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
An issue in the component /stl/actions/download?filePath of SSCMS v7.3.1 allows attackers to execute a directory traversal.

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

A directory traversal vulnerability in the /stl/actions/download endpoint of SSCMS v7.3.1 allows attackers to read arbitrary files on the server by manipulating the filePath parameter with path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../../). The download functionality does not properly validate or sanitize user-supplied file paths, allowing access outside the intended directory.

MitigationImplement strict input validation on the filePath parameter to restrict paths to allowed directories only. Use canonicalization and deny any path containing traversal sequences or attempting to access paths outside the web root.

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
SscmsApplication
Affected:= 7.3.1

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
None

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

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

  1. Identify SSCMS version
    Check the installed SSCMS version by reviewing the application deployment files, DLL metadata, or the admin panel version information. Common locations include the About page in the admin dashboard or the assembly version of the web application binaries.
    Affected if The installed version is exactly 7.3.1 (the affected version)
  2. Confirm /stl/actions/download endpoint exists
    Verify that the /stl/actions/download endpoint is present and accessible in the deployed SSCMS instance by checking the site's URL routing and published files.
    Affected if The /stl/actions/download endpoint exists and responds to requests in the deployed application
  3. Check if STL channel module is enabled
    Review the SSCMS site configuration to determine whether the STL (Site Template Language) module or channel functionality is enabled, as the vulnerable endpoint is part of this feature.
    Affected if The STL module or any channel functionality is enabled in the SSCMS configuration
  4. Test for path traversal vulnerability
    If authorized and safe to do so, send a request to /stl/actions/download with a filePath parameter containing path traversal sequences (e.g., filePath=../../../web.config) and observe whether the server returns content from outside the intended download directory.
    Affected if The endpoint returns files from paths outside the expected download directory, confirming the directory traversal exists

A user is affected if they are running SSCMS version 7.3.1 with the STL module enabled and the /stl/actions/download endpoint accessible, allowing unauthorized file access via path traversal.

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

Implement strict input validation on the filePath parameter to restrict paths to allowed directories only. Use canonicalization and deny any path containing traversal sequences or attempting to access paths outside the web root.

Fix this in Sscms Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,640
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-52237 — 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-2025-52237 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