EvervaultApplication
CVE-2025-64186
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 · uneditedEvervault is a payment security solution. A vulnerability was identified in the `evervault-go` SDK’s attestation verification logic in versions of `evervault-go` prior to 1.3.2 that may allow incomplete documents to pass validation. This may cause the client to trust an enclave operator that does not meet expected integrity guarantees. The exploitability of this issue is limited in Evervault-hosted environments as an attacker would require the pre-requisite ability to serve requests from specific evervault domain names, following from our ACME challenge based TLS certificate acquisition pipeline. The vulnerability primarily affects applications which only check PCR8. Though the efficacy is also reduced for applications that check all PCR values, the impact is largely remediated by checking PCR 0, 1 and 2. The identified issue has been addressed in version 1.3.2 by validating attestation documents before storing in the cache, and replacing the naive equality checks with a new SatisfiedBy check. Those who useevervault-go to attest Enclaves that are hosted outside of Evervault environments and cannot upgrade have two possible workarounds available. Modify the application logic to fail verification if PCR8 is not explicitly present and non-empty and/or add custom pre-validation to reject documents that omit any required PCRs.
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 analysisThe application accepts signed data without properly verifying the signature, so an attacker can forge or tamper with content that the system is meant to trust — tokens, updates, licences. Everything built on that trust then becomes unreliable. Remediation is verifying every signature against the correct key and rejecting anything that does not validate.
General guidance for the improper signature verification 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
EvervaultApplication
< 1.3.2CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 · scoped1.3.2
1.3.2
- 1. Identify the current version of evervault-go in use by checking go.mod or running `go list -m github.com/evervault/evervault-go`
- 2. Upgrade to version 1.3.2 by running `go get github.com/evervault/[email protected]` or updating the version in go.mod
- 3. Run `go mod tidy` to update dependencies and ensure the new version is properly integrated
- 4. Rebuild and test the application to verify attestation verification still functions correctly with the new SatisfiedBy check implementation
- 5. If using only PCR8 checking, verify that the application properly rejects attestations missing required PCR values as intended by the fix
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64186 — 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-2025-64186 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