CVE-2025-71334
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 · uneditedFlowise before 3.0.6 (affected versions 2.2.8 and earlier) contains an arbitrary file access vulnerability due to missing validation that the chatflowId and chatId parameters are UUIDs or numbers in file handling operations. By supplying a path-traversal value (e.g., '../../../../../tmp') as the chatflow id, an unauthenticated attacker can use the /api/v1/chatflows endpoint (via addBase64FilesToStorage) to write arbitrary files, and the /api/v1/get-upload-file and /api/v1/openai-assistants-file/download endpoints (via streamStorageFile) to read arbitrary files. Arbitrary file write may lead to remote code execution.
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 confidenceFlowise before 3.0.6 lacks validation that chatflowId/chatId parameters are proper UUIDs or numbers, allowing path traversal sequences (e.g., '../../../../../tmp') in these parameters. This enables unauthenticated attackers to write arbitrary files via /api/v1/chatflows (addBase64FilesToStorage) and read arbitrary files via /api/v1/get-upload-file and /api/v1/openai-assistants-file/download (streamStorageFile), leading to potential RCE.
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< 3.0.6CVSS 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.
-
Check installed Flowise versionRun `npm list flowise` or check the version field in package.json at the Flowise installation directory. Alternatively, inspect the running container or service metadata.Affected if Version is below 3.0.6 (e.g., 3.0.5, 3.0.4, earlier versions)
-
Verify API endpoints are exposedAttempt to access the Flowise web interface or API base URL (typically port 3000). Confirm the /api/v1/* endpoints are reachable without authentication.Affected if The Flowise API is externally accessible and no network segmentation or authentication is required to reach the /api/v1/ endpoints
-
Check if file upload endpoint accepts path traversalSend a POST request to /api/v1/chatflows with a chatflowId parameter containing path traversal sequences such as `../../../../../tmp/test`. Inspect the response for validation errors versus successful file write operations.Affected if The API accepts path traversal sequences in the chatflowId parameter without rejecting them (no UUID/number validation)
-
Check if file download endpoint is vulnerableSend a GET request to /api/v1/get-upload-file with a chatflowId parameter containing `../../../../etc/passwd` or similar path traversal. Observe if arbitrary file contents are returned.Affected if The API returns file contents from arbitrary paths when path traversal sequences are used in the chatflowId parameter
You are affected if Flowise version is below 3.0.6 AND the vulnerable /api/v1/chatflows, /api/v1/get-upload-file, or /api/v1/openai-assistants-file/download endpoints are accessible without proper path traversal validation.
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 · scoped3.0.6
Upgrade to Flowise version 3.0.6 or later which adds proper validation to reject path traversal sequences in chatflowId parameters.
Flowise 3.0.6
- Upgrade Flowise to version 3.0.6 or later to remediate this vulnerability.
- After upgrading, verify that the /api/v1/chatflows, /api/v1/get-upload-file, and /api/v1/openai-assistants-file/download endpoints properly validate that chatflowId and chatId parameters are valid UUIDs or numbers before processing file operations.
- Test that path traversal attempts (e.g., using '../../' in parameters) are rejected with an error response.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2025-71334 — 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-2025-71334 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