Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2025-9650

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-08-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
60/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable 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 vulnerability has been found in yeqifu carRental up to 3fabb7eae93d209426638863980301d6f99866b3. This affects the function removeFileByPath of the file src/main/java/com/yeqifu/sys/utils/AppFileUtils.java. The manipulation of the argument carimg leads to path traversal. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product adopts a rolling release strategy to maintain continuous delivery

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 the removeFileByPath function of AppFileUtils.java in the carRental application. By supplying path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../) in the carimg argument, an attacker can manipulate file deletion to target files outside the intended directory. The vulnerability is exploitable remotely and a proof-of-concept is publicly available.

MitigationImplement strict input validation on the carimg parameter using canonical path comparison to ensure the resolved path stays within the intended upload directory before allowing file deletion.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

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. Identify carRental application presence
    Locate the carRental application deployment (war file, source code, or running service). Search for AppFileUtils.java in the codebase.
    Affected if The carRental application with AppFileUtils.java containing removeFileByPath function is present in the environment
  2. Find the carimg parameter handler
    Search the codebase for HTTP endpoints or servlet mappings that accept the 'carimg' parameter and call the removeFileByPath function.
    Affected if An endpoint exists that passes the carimg parameter to removeFileByPath without validation
  3. Inspect removeFileByPath for input validation
    Examine AppFileUtils.java and locate the removeFileByPath function. Review the function code to see if it performs canonical path resolution and directory boundary checks before file deletion.
    Affected if The function lacks canonical path validation or does not verify the resolved path stays within an allowed directory
  4. Verify carimg parameter handling in the request flow
    Trace how the carimg parameter flows from the HTTP request through to the removeFileByPath call. Check if any validation (allowlist, path normalization, directory boundary check) occurs before the function is invoked.
    Affected if No input validation, path canonicalization, or directory boundary check is performed on carimg before it reaches removeFileByPath
  5. Confirm file deletion target directory isolation
    Identify the intended upload/deletion directory for car images. Check if the application prevents deletion of files outside this directory.
    Affected if The application allows files to be deleted from directories outside the intended car image upload directory

The environment is affected if the carRental application is deployed and the carimg parameter passed to removeFileByPath lacks proper path traversal validation, allowing deletion of files outside the intended directory.

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

Implement strict input validation on the carimg parameter using canonical path comparison to ensure the resolved path stays within the intended upload directory before allowing file deletion.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9650 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-9650 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