Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-53513 is a high-severity Path Traversal: '../filedir' (CWE-24) vulnerability in Canonical Juju. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 48th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) 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-2025-53513 is a high-severity vulnerability in the Juju controller, published on 2025-07-08, stemming from insufficient authorization checks on the /charms endpoint. This flaw allows any user with an account on the controller to upload charms without proper restrictions. A malicious charm exploiting a Zip Slip vulnerability (associated with CWE-24: Relative Path Traversal and CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory) could then be used to compromise machines running units of that charm. The issue 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).
Attackers require only low privileges, specifically an account on the Juju controller, to exploit this remotely over the network with low complexity and no user interaction. By uploading a crafted malicious charm, the attacker can leverage the Zip Slip vulnerability during charm deployment or processing, achieving high-impact confidentiality, integrity, and availability violations, including unauthorized access to the underlying machine hosting a unit of the charm.
Mitigation details are outlined in the official Juju security advisory available at https://github.com/juju/juju/security/advisories/GHSA-24ch-w38v-xmh8.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-20670
Vulnerability Data
The /charms endpoint on a Juju controller lacked sufficient authorization checks, allowing any user with an account on the controller to upload a charm. Uploading a malicious charm that exploits a Zip Slip vulnerability could allow an attacker to gain…
more
access to a machine running a unit through the affected charm.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
Input validation directly neutralizes '../' sequences in externally-supplied pathnames before they are resolved.
Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.
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 SDLC practices directly require input validation and path sanitization that prevent ../ traversal.
Patching/maintenance can remediate known path-traversal flaws in deployed software (partial prevention of exploitability) but does nothing to stop the coding defect from being introduced in the first place.
PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
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.
Secure coding standards require neutralizing ../ sequences and canonicalizing paths before file operations.
Security testing in development catches path-traversal flaws before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path canonicalization that directly block ../ traversal.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against path traversal in file-handling functions.
Secure architecture principles reduce attack surface but do not prescribe the specific coding fix.
Information access restriction limits which files can be reached, mitigating impact of traversal.