dbcve.org
Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2025-9118

CRITICAL · 10.0 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-08-25
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A path traversal vulnerability in the NPM package installation process of Google Cloud Dataform allows a remote attacker to read and write files in other customers' repositories via a maliciously crafted package.json file.

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 confidence

A path traversal vulnerability exists in Google Cloud Dataform's NPM package installation process. By including path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../../') in a malicious package.json file, an attacker can escape the intended installation directory and read or write files outside the customer's isolated repository space, potentially accessing or modifying other customers' data.

MitigationGoogle must implement strict path validation and directory isolation in the package installation process to prevent traversal beyond the customer's designated repository boundaries. Customers should monitor for security bulletins from Google Cloud and verify the patch is applied.

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
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm use of Google Cloud Dataform
    Check if your environment uses Google Cloud Dataform for data transformation workflows. Look for Dataform resources in your Google Cloud project (gcloud dataform repository list or check Terraform/GCP console)
    Affected if Your project uses Google Cloud Dataform service
  2. Identify Dataform version
    Run 'gcloud dataform repository describe <repo-name>' or check your Dataform configuration files for the version field. Compare against any Google Cloud advisory notes for this CVE
    Affected if Running an affected version of Dataform that has not been patched
  3. Inspect package.json for path traversal
    Review all package.json files in your Dataform repositories. Search for patterns like '../' or '..\' in file paths, script commands, or dependency references
    Affected if Any package.json contains path traversal sequences that could escape the installation directory
  4. Check for unexpected file locations
    Review your Dataform installation directory and check if any files exist outside the expected 'node_modules' or workspace directory structure
    Affected if Files are found in directories outside the intended installation path
  5. Audit Dataform access logs
    Examine Google Cloud Dataform audit logs (Cloud Logging with filter: resource.type="dataform.googleapis.com/Repository"). Look for access patterns from other tenant projects or unusual repository access
    Affected if Logs show access from other tenant projects or unauthorized repository operations

You are affected if you use Google Cloud Dataform and find path traversal sequences in package.json files, files outside the expected installation directory, or cross-tenant access patterns in your audit logs.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Google must implement strict path validation and directory isolation in the package installation process to prevent traversal beyond the customer's designated repository boundaries. Customers should monitor for security bulletins from Google Cloud and verify the patch is applied.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation8.0 h
  • Implementation24.0 h
  • Testing16.0 h
  • Review / QA8.0 h
56.0 hours of engineering $9,760
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,616.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9118 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-9118 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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