Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-32996

Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware ≤ 2.0.8

Published
15 April 2025
Modified
21 October 2025
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 4.0
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0044 37th percentile
Risk Priority 34 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-32996 is a medium-severity Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation (CWE-670) vulnerability in Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware. Its CVSS base score is 4.0 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 37th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In http-proxy-middleware before 2.0.8 and 3.x before 3.0.4, writeBody can be called twice because "else if" is not used.

CWE(s)
CWE-670

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-21536Same product: Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware
CVE-2026-55602Same product: Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware
CVE-2025-32997Same product: Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware
CVE-2026-55603Same product: Chimurai Http-Proxy-Middleware
CVE-2024-25622Shared CWE-670
CVE-2023-41058Shared CWE-670
CVE-2023-52781Shared CWE-670
CVE-2026-6608Shared CWE-670
CVE-2026-55276Shared CWE-670
CVE-2024-38365Shared CWE-670

Affected Assets

chimurai
http-proxy-middleware
≤ 2.0.8 · 3.0.0 — 3.0.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V9.2.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation at post-design stages directly exercises control-flow paths and reveals mismatches between implemented and intended behavior.

SA-15 Development Process, Standards, and Tools partial match

Requiring a documented development process and supporting tools reduces the chance that incorrect control-flow logic is introduced in the first place.

SI-2 Flaw Remediation partial match

Flaw identification and remediation processes can locate and correct control-flow errors once they manifest as incorrect runtime behavior.

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 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly prevent incorrect control-flow implementations via reviews, testing, and static analysis.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect paths that deviate from intended logic.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development lifecycle processes can catch incorrect control-flow logic during design and code review.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards and reviews directly target flawed control-flow implementations.

A.8.32 Change management partial match
prevents

Change-management gates may prevent deployment of flawed logic but do not address the coding defect itself.

References