CVE-2025-65025
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 · uneditedesm.sh is a nobuild content delivery network(CDN) for modern web development. Prior to version 136, the esm.sh CDN service is vulnerable to path traversal during NPM package tarball extraction. An attacker can craft a malicious NPM package containing specially crafted file paths (e.g., package/../../tmp/evil.js). When esm.sh downloads and extracts this package, files may be written to arbitrary locations on the server, escaping the intended extraction directory. This issue has been patched in version 136.
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 confidenceesm.sh CDN prior to version 136 is vulnerable to path traversal during NPM package tarball extraction. Attackers can craft malicious packages with paths like 'package/../../tmp/evil.js' to escape the intended extraction directory and write files to arbitrary locations on the server.
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< 136CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Identify if you self-host esm.shCheck your infrastructure for any esm.sh CDN instances or containers you operate. Look for services that serve NPM packages from esm.sh URLs that you control.Affected if You run your own instance of the esm.sh CDN server
-
Check esm.sh versionIf you self-host esm.sh, run 'esm.sh --version' or check the Docker image tag or git commit hash of your installation.Affected if The version is below 136, indicating the vulnerable code is present
-
Verify package extraction is enabledConfirm the CDN is configured to download and extract NPM tarballs. This is the default behavior for esm.sh as a package CDN.Affected if The CDN extracts NPM tarballs from registries (this is the vulnerable code path)
You are affected only if you self-host an esm.sh CDN instance version 136 or earlier and that instance extracts NPM package tarballs.
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.
dbcve · scoped136
Upgrade esm.sh to version 136 or later, which contains the patch for this path traversal vulnerability.
version 136
- Identify the current esm.sh version in use by checking the running service or deployment configuration
- Plan a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Upgrade esm.sh to version 136 or later by updating the deployment to use the new version
- If using a containerized deployment, update the container image tag to use version 136
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the esm.sh version after deployment
- Test that the CDN service is functioning correctly with the new version
- Monitor logs for any errors related to the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-65025 — 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-2025-65025 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