CVE-2025-5791
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 · uneditedA flaw was found in the user's crate for Rust. This vulnerability allows privilege escalation via incorrect group listing when a user or process has fewer than exactly 1024 groups, leading to the erroneous inclusion of the root group in the access list.
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 vulnerability in a Rust crate's group listing functionality incorrectly includes the root group (GID 0) in the access list when a user or process has fewer than exactly 1024 groups, allowing privilege escalation.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the Rust crate in useSearch project dependencies (Cargo.toml, lock files) for crates that handle group/user enumeration or POSIX group functions. Look for crates related to user management, authentication, or Unix group handling.Affected if A vulnerable crate handling group enumeration is present in dependencies
-
Check the current user's supplementary group countRun 'id' or 'groups' command to list all groups the current user belongs to. Count the number of supplementary (non-primary) groups.Affected if The user belongs to fewer than exactly 1024 groups (0-1023 groups)
-
Verify if GID 0 appears in supplementary groupsRun 'id -G' to get all group IDs, then verify whether 0 is present in the list beyond the primary group (typically first in primary GID). Also run 'getent group root' to check root group membership.Affected if GID 0 (root) appears in the supplementary groups list for a user with fewer than 1024 groups
-
Check for processes running with elevated group privilegesReview running processes or services that use group-based access control. Use 'ps aux' and check group memberships of service accounts.Affected if Services or processes run with group permissions where GID 0 could be improperly included in access checks
-
Audit application logs for unexpected privilege escalationReview authentication/authorization logs for unusual group-based access grants, especially for users who should not have root group privileges.Affected if Users unexpectedly gain root group (GID 0) access without explicit authorization
A user is affected if they have fewer than 1024 groups AND GID 0 appears in their supplementary group list, indicating the Rust crate's group enumeration bug is triggering and including root in the access list.
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 dataUpdate the affected Rust crate to a patched version that correctly handles group enumeration boundary conditions and properly excludes the root group from access lists unless explicitly authorized.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-5791 — 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-2025-5791 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