Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/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:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:AmberSummary
CVE-2025-2787 is a high-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Knime Business Hub. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 39th 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-2025-2787 affects KNIME Business Hub deployments through its use of the ingress-nginx component, which is vulnerable to CVE-2025-1974, also known as IngressNightmare. This code injection vulnerability, classified under CWE-94, carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). The issue stems from the ingress-nginx controller's handling of certain configurations, enabling remote code execution within the Kubernetes environment where KNIME Business Hub operates.
Exploitation requires an authenticated user with access from within the Kubernetes cluster, limiting the attack surface compared to fully public exposures. A successful attack could allow the adversary to achieve remote code execution on the ingress-nginx pod, potentially leading to a complete takeover of the Kubernetes cluster in the worst case. While the cluster-internal reachability slightly reduces the contextual severity for KNIME Business Hub, the high-impact potential warrants immediate attention.
The KNIME security advisory recommends applying publicly known workarounds for CVE-2025-1974 alongside updating to patched versions of KNIME Business Hub: 1.13.3 or later, 1.12.4 or later, 1.11.4 or later, or 1.10.4 or later. Full details are available at https://www.knime.com/security-advisory-cve-2025-2787.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-8256
Vulnerability Data
KNIME Business Hub is affected by the Ingress-nginx CVE-2025-1974 ( a.k.a IngressNightmare ) vulnerability which affects the ingress-nginx component. In the worst case a complete takeover of the Kubernetes cluster is possible. Since the affected component is only reachable from…
more
within the cluster, i.e. requires an authenticated user, the severity in the context of KNIME Business Hub is slightly lower. Besides applying the publicly known workarounds, we strongly recommend updating to one of the following versions of KNIME Business Hub: * 1.13.3 or above * 1.12.4 or above * 1.11.4 or above * 1.10.4 or above *
- CWE(s)
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.