CVE-2025-64671
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 · uneditedImproper neutralization of special elements used in a command ('command injection') in Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code locally.
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 command injection vulnerability exists in Copilot where improper neutralization of special elements in commands allows an unauthorized attacker to execute arbitrary code locally. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input sanitization when handling command strings, enabling injection of shell metacharacters or additional commands.
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< 1.5.60-243CVSS 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify Copilot installationCheck if GitHub Copilot extension is installed in your IDE (VS Code, Visual Studio, JetBrains). Look for the Copilot icon in the sidebar or check IDE extension settings.Affected if Copilot is installed and the extension/plugin is present in the IDE environment
-
Determine Copilot versionOpen your IDE extension settings or package manager and locate the Copilot extension version information. In VS Code, go to Extensions > Copilot > version field. Compare the installed version number to the affected range: versions below 1.5.60-243 are vulnerable.Affected if Installed Copilot version is less than 1.5.60-243 (e.g., 1.5.50, 1.4.0, etc.)
-
Confirm command execution capability is enabledCheck Copilot settings for any features that execute generated commands or scripts locally. Look for settings related to 'command execution', 'shell command', 'terminal integration', or 'code execution' within Copilot configuration.Affected if Copilot has permission or settings enabled to execute commands/scripts in a local shell or terminal environment
-
Inspect recent command execution logsReview IDE logs, terminal history, or Copilot activity logs for any unexpected or unauthorized command executions. Check the IDE's output panel, debug console, or integrated terminal history for commands you did not initiate.Affected if Logs show command executions containing shell metacharacters (such as ; | & $ `) or commands that were not explicitly initiated by the user
You are affected if Copilot is installed with a version lower than 1.5.60-243 and command execution features are enabled, allowing potential injection of shell metacharacters through Copilot interactions.
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 data1.5.60-243
Implement strict input validation and sanitization for all command arguments, utilize parameterized command execution APIs instead of shell invocation, and apply principle of least privilege to limit local code execution capabilities.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-64671 — 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-2025-64671 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