CVE-2025-46730
Opensecurity Mobile Security Framework ≤ 4.3.3
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-46730 is a medium-severity Data Amplification (CWE-409) vulnerability in Opensecurity Mobile Security Framework. Its CVSS base score is 6.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 39th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-13409
Vulnerability Data
MobSF is a mobile application security testing tool used. Typically, MobSF is deployed on centralized internal or cloud-based servers that also host other security tools and web applications. Access to the MobSF web interface is often granted to internal security…
more
teams, audit teams, and external vendors. MobSF provides a feature that allows users to upload ZIP files for static analysis. Upon upload, these ZIP files are automatically extracted and stored within the MobSF directory. However, in versions up to and including 4.3.2, this functionality lacks a check on the total uncompressed size of the ZIP file, making it vulnerable to a ZIP of Death (zip bomb) attack. Due to the absence of safeguards against oversized extractions, an attacker can craft a specially prepared ZIP file that is small in compressed form but expands to a massive size upon extraction. Exploiting this, an attacker can exhaust the server's disk space, leading to a complete denial of service (DoS) not just for MobSF, but also for any other applications or websites hosted on the same server. This vulnerability can lead to complete server disruption in an organization which can affect other internal portals and tools too (which are hosted on the same server). If some organization has created their customized cloud based mobile security tool using MobSF core then an attacker can exploit this vulnerability to crash their servers. Commit 6987a946485a795f4fd38cebdb4860b368a1995d fixes this issue. As an additional mitigation, it is recommended to implement a safeguard that checks the total uncompressed size of any uploaded ZIP file before extraction. If the estimated uncompressed size exceeds a safe threshold (e.g., 100 MB), MobSF should reject the file and notify the user.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation can reject or limit decompression of data whose expansion ratio exceeds safe thresholds.
DoS protection limits the resource-exhaustion impact when a decompression bomb is processed.
Resource allocation controls bound memory/CPU consumption that a data-amplification attack would otherwise exhaust.
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.
Secure-development practices include input-validation and resource-limit checks that prevent improper handling of compressed data.
Runtime monitoring of compute resources can detect exhaustion caused by decompression bombs.
Capacity planning and monitoring directly limits the availability impact of data-amplification attacks.
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.
Security testing can uncover decompression-bomb vulnerabilities before release.
Redundancy helps availability but does not address the root cause of the weakness.
Monitoring can detect anomalous resource usage but does not prevent the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle includes input validation and resource-limit checks that mitigate data-amplification attacks.
Application security requirements can mandate limits on decompression size and ratio.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design against resource-exhaustion threats.