CVE-2025-6723
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 · uneditedChef InSpec versions up to 5.23 and before 7.0.107 creates named pipes with overly permissive default Windows access controls. A local attacker may interfere with the pipe connection process and exploit the insufficient access restrictions to assume the InSpec execution context, potentially resulting in elevated privileges or operational disruption. This issue affects Chef Inspec: through 5.23 and before 7.0.107
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 confidenceChef InSpec versions up to 5.23 and before 7.0.107 create Windows named pipes with overly permissive default access controls. A local attacker can interfere with the pipe connection process due to insufficient access restrictions, allowing them to assume the InSpec execution context and potentially gain elevated privileges or cause operational disruption.
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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 Chef InSpec is installedRun 'inspec --version' or 'chef-inspec --version' from command line to retrieve the installed version numberAffected if No version output or command not found indicates InSpec is not installed
-
Compare installed version to affected rangeReview the version output from step 1 and compare against: versions up to 5.23, or versions 5.24 through 7.0.106Affected if Installed version is 5.23 or lower, OR between 5.24 and 7.0.106 inclusive
-
Confirm Windows operating systemRun 'systeminfo' or check OS via 'Get-ComputerInfo' PowerShell command, looking for Windows in the OS nameAffected if The system is running Windows (this vulnerability only affects Windows named pipe creation)
-
Determine if InSpec uses named pipe executionReview InSpec configuration files (inspec.yml, profile.yml) or check if InSpec is run with remote execution targets that use Windows named pipesAffected if InSpec is configured to execute against Windows targets using the default transport which creates named pipes
User is affected if Chef InSpec versions 5.23 or lower, or 5.24 through 7.0.106 are installed on Windows and actively using InSpec execution features that create named pipes
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 · scopedUpgrade Chef InSpec to version 7.0.107 or later to obtain the patched version with proper Windows named pipe access controls.
7.0.107
- Upgrade Chef InSpec to version 7.0.107 or later
- Verify the installed version using `inspec --version` to confirm the upgrade was successful
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-6723 — 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-2025-6723 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