Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-14009 is a high-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Nltk Nltk. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 47% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as NLP Libraries; in the Supply Chain and Deployment risk domain.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-207820
Vulnerability Data
A critical vulnerability exists in the NLTK downloader component of nltk/nltk, affecting all versions. The _unzip_iter function in nltk/downloader.py uses zipfile.extractall() without performing path validation or security checks. This allows attackers to craft malicious zip packages that, when downloaded and…
more
extracted by NLTK, can execute arbitrary code. The vulnerability arises because NLTK assumes all downloaded packages are trusted and extracts them without validation. If a malicious package contains Python files, such as __init__.py, these files are executed automatically upon import, leading to remote code execution. This issue can result in full system compromise, including file system access, network access, and potential persistence mechanisms.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- NLP Libraries
- Risk Domain
- Supply Chain and Deployment
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: nltk
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.