CVE-2025-69198
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 · uneditedPterodactyl is a free, open-source game server management panel. Pterodactyl implements rate limits that are applied to the total number of resources (e.g. databases, port allocations, or backups) that can exist for an individual server. These resource limits are applied on a per-server basis, and validated during the request cycle. However, in versions prior to 1.12.0, it is possible for a malicious user to send a massive volume of requests at the same time that would create more resources than the server is allotted. This is because the validation occurs early in the request cycle and does not lock the target resource while it is processing. As a result sending a large volume of requests at the same time would lead all of those requests to validate as not using any of the target resources, and then all creating the resources at the same time. As a result a server would be able to create more databases, allocations, or backups than configured. A malicious user is able to deny resources to other users on the system, and may be able to excessively consume the limited allocations for a node, or fill up backup space faster than is allowed by the system. Version 1.12.0 fixes the issue.
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 analysisA single request can consume unbounded CPU, memory, or connections, so a modest amount of malicious traffic exhausts the service. The result is denial of service for everyone else. Remediation is enforcing limits, quotas, and timeouts on what any one request can use.
General guidance for the uncontrolled resource consumption 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< 1.12.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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 · scoped1.12.0
1.12.0
- Backup your Pterodactyl panel database and configuration files before proceeding with the upgrade
- Update your Pterodactyl panel installation to version 1.12.0 using your installation method (e.g., for Docker-based installations, update the image tag to 1.12.0; for manual installations, pull the latest code and run composer install --no-dev --optimize-autoloader)
- Run any pending database migrations: php artisan migrate
- Clear and rebuild the application cache: php artisan cache:clear && php artisan config:clear
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the panel version in the admin area
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-2025-69198 — 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-2025-69198 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