Jupyter ServerApplication · Jupyter

CVE-2025-61669

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-05
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 2.18.0 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Public exploit Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Jupyter Server is the backend for Jupyter web applications. In jupyter_server versions through 2.17.0, the next query parameter in the login flow is insufficiently validated in `LoginFormHandler._redirect_safe()`, which allows redirects to arbitrary external domains via values such as `///example.com`. An attacker can use a crafted login URL to redirect users to a malicious site and facilitate phishing attacks. This issue is fixed in version 2.18.0.

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
How this class of weakness works · CWE-601

The application redirects the browser to a URL taken from user input without validating it, so an attacker can craft a link on your trusted domain that quietly bounces victims to a malicious site. It is a staple of phishing and token theft. The fix is to allow-list redirect destinations or use indirect reference keys, never a raw user-supplied URL.

General guidance for the open redirect class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →

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
Jupyter ServerApplication
Affected:< 2.18.0

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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 2.18.0 or later
Fixed in 2.18.0
Recommended fix High confidence

2.18.0

  1. Identify the current Jupyter Server version installed (e.g., run `pip show jupyter_server` or check your environment's package list)
  2. Upgrade Jupyter Server to version 2.18.0 or later using your package manager (e.g., `pip install --upgrade jupyter_server>=2.18.0` or equivalent for your environment)
  3. After upgrading, verify the new version is installed correctly
  4. Restart any Jupyter Server instances to ensure the patched version is loaded
  5. Test that the login flow correctly rejects external redirect URLs (e.g., URLs with `///example.com` in the `next` parameter)

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can perform the upgrade in your staging environment and verify nothing breaks — typical engagement from $900. Get the upgrade done

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61669 — 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-2025-61669 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