CVE-2025-22137
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-22137 is a critical-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 45th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-22137 is a critical vulnerability in Pingvin Share, a self-hosted file sharing platform designed as an alternative to WeTransfer. The flaw enables arbitrary file overwrites on the server, including sensitive system files, through HTTP POST requests due to improper input validation (CWE-20) and unrestricted handling of dangerous file types (CWE-434). It affects versions of Pingvin Share prior to 1.4.0 and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
Attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. Both authenticated users and unauthenticated users (if anonymous shares are permitted) can target it without privileges, achieving high-impact compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability by overwriting critical files on the server.
The vulnerability has been patched in Pingvin Share version 1.4.0. Mitigation involves upgrading to this version or later, as detailed in the GitHub security advisory (GHSA-rjwx-p44f-mcrv) and the associated fix commits.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-2656
Vulnerability Data
Pingvin Share is a self-hosted file sharing platform and an alternative for WeTransfer. This vulnerability allows an authenticated or unauthenticated (if anonymous shares are allowed) user to overwrite arbitrary files on the server, including sensitive system files, via HTTP POST…
more
requests. The issue has been patched in version 1.4.0.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V5.1.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Malicious-code protection at entry points blocks dangerous file types from being accepted and executed.
Least functionality restricts the file types and automatic processing capabilities the system will accept.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
Mobile-code controls define, authorize, and block unacceptable uploaded code before automatic processing occurs.
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.
Restricting execution of unauthorized software directly blocks dangerous uploaded files from running.
Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.
Hardened configuration baselines can enforce allowed file types and processing rules.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Mandated testing for malicious content and known vulnerabilities reduces the likelihood that an outsourced component will contain or accept dangerous file types that could later be uploaded or executed.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20