CVE-2025-69106
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 · uneditedUnauthenticated Local File Inclusion in Imba <= 1.5.0 versions.
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 confidenceUnauthenticated Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability in Imba web framework versions 1.5.0 and below allows remote attackers to read sensitive files on the server by manipulating file path parameters without proper validation.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 Imba framework is in useCheck for Imba in project dependencies: inspect package.json for 'imba' in dependencies/devDependencies, or run 'npm list imba' to list installed packagesAffected if Imba is listed as a dependency in package.json or installed in node_modules
-
Determine installed Imba versionRun 'npm list imba' or manually inspect package.json to read the version number next to 'imba'Affected if The installed version is 1.5.0 or lower (e.g., 1.5.0, 1.4.0, 1.3.0, etc.)
-
Check if web server endpoints are exposedIdentify any publicly accessible routes served by the Imba application by reviewing application routing configuration or by probing common paths (e.g., /, /api, /routes)Affected if The Imba application is running and accessible over HTTP/HTTPS without authentication
-
Inspect for file-serving functionalityReview application source code for route handlers that accept file paths as parameters, such as routes using file:// or fs module with user-controlled input, or test by attempting to access known file paths via URL parametersAffected if The application contains endpoints that read or serve files based on URL parameters without proper validation
You are affected if your environment runs Imba framework version 1.5.0 or lower and exposes any web-accessible endpoints that handle file requests without authentication.
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 dataUpgrade Imba to a version newer than 1.5.0 that includes proper path validation and sanitization to prevent directory traversal attacks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69106 — 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-2025-69106 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