dbcve.org
Incorrect Default PermissionsWeakness · CWE-276

CVE-2025-61035

HIGH · 7.7 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
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
The seffaflik thru 0.0.9 is vulnerable to symlink attacks due to incorrect default permissions given to the .kimlik file and .seffaflik file, which is created with mode 0777 and 0775 respectively, exposing secrets to other local users. Additionally, the .kimlik file is written without symlink checks, allowing local attackers to overwrite arbitrary files. This can result in information disclosure and denial of service.

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 · high confidence

The seffaflik package through version 0.0.9 creates two configuration files (.kimlik with mode 0777 and .seffaflik with mode 0775) with overly permissive default permissions, exposing sensitive secrets to all local users. Additionally, writes to .kimlik lack symlink checks, allowing local attackers to create symlinks and overwrite arbitrary files on the system.

MitigationFix file creation to use restrictive permissions (0600 or stricter) and implement symlink existence checks before writing to prevent symlink attacks and arbitrary file overwrite.

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
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
High

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

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

  1. Check if seffaflik package is installed
    Run 'pip show seffaflik' or 'pip list | grep seffaflik' to see if the package is present in your Python environment
    Affected if The package is not installed means you are not affected; if installed, continue to next checks
  2. Determine installed version of seffaflik
    Run 'pip show seffaflik' and note the Version field, or use 'pip list --format=freeze | grep seffaflik'
    Affected if Version 0.0.9 or earlier indicates the vulnerable version range
  3. Locate the .kimlik configuration file
    Search for .kimlik file in common locations such as the current working directory, user home directory, or application working directory using 'find ~ -name .kimlik 2>/dev/null' or 'ls -la .kimlik' in suspect directories
    Affected if File exists and was created by seffaflik package (continue to permission check)
  4. Check permissions on .kimlik file
    Run 'ls -la .kimlik' on the found file and examine the permission bits in the first column (e.g., -rwxrwxrwx)
    Affected if Permissions show 0777 (rwxrwxrwx) or similarly overly permissive mode indicating vulnerability
  5. Check permissions on .seffaflik configuration file
    Run 'find ~ -name .seffaflik 2>/dev/null' then 'ls -la' on the found file to inspect its permission bits
    Affected if Permissions show 0775 (rwxrwxr-x) or overly permissive mode indicating vulnerability
  6. Test for symlink vulnerability on .kimlik
    Create a test symlink in the same directory as .kimlik pointing to a test file, then trigger seffaflik to write to .kimlik and observe if the target file is overwritten (do this in a test environment)
    Affected if Symlink attack succeeds - arbitrary file can be overwritten through .kimlik write operations

You are affected if seffaflik version 0.0.9 or earlier is installed AND either .kimlik exists with mode 0777 or .seffaflik exists with mode 0775, or if .kimlik lacks symlink protection allowing arbitrary file overwrites.

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

Fix file creation to use restrictive permissions (0600 or stricter) and implement symlink existence checks before writing to prevent symlink attacks and arbitrary file overwrite.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61035 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2025-61035 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