Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-59425

Vllm ≤ 0.11.0

Public PoC
Published
07 October 2025
Modified
16 October 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0053 42th percentile
Risk Priority 58 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-59425 is a high-severity Covert Timing Channel (CWE-385) vulnerability in Vllm Vllm. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 42th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as NLP and Transformers; in the Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms risk domain.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-31 (Covert Channel Analysis) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Before version 0.11.0rc2, the API key support in vLLM performs validation using a method that was vulnerable to a timing attack. API key validation uses a string comparison…

more

that takes longer the more characters the provided API key gets correct. Data analysis across many attempts could allow an attacker to determine when it finds the next correct character in the key sequence. Deployments relying on vLLM's built-in API key validation are vulnerable to authentication bypass using this technique. Version 0.11.0rc2 fixes the issue.

CWE(s)

AI Security AnalysisAI

AI Category
NLP and Transformers
Risk Domain
Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms
OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
None mapped
Classification Reason
Matched keywords: llms, vllm

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001 Data Obfuscation Command And Control
Adversaries may obfuscate command and control traffic to make it more difficult to detect.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-66448Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2026-22773Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-29770Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-48944Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-62372Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-62426Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-30202Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-46570Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2025-30165Same product: Vllm Vllm
CVE-2026-24779Same product: Vllm Vllm

Affected Assets

vllm
vllm
0.11.0 · ≤ 0.11.0

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Covert channel analysis directly identifies timing channels that could leak information.

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 development practices (reviews, testing) directly reduce introduction of timing-channel vulnerabilities in code.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of hardware/software behavior can detect anomalous timing patterns that indicate covert channels.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes can surface timing-channel weaknesses during design or code 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.8.15 Logging partial match
degrades

Detailed logging can reveal timing anomalies but does not prevent covert timing channels.

finds

Continuous monitoring may detect timing-based exfiltration but does not eliminate the channel itself.

mitigates

Network segmentation reduces attack surface but does not address intra-process timing channels.

mitigates

Network segregation limits external timing observation but not internal covert timing.

prevents

Secure architecture principles can include timing-channel countermeasures but are not specific.

prevents

Secure coding guidelines may recommend constant-time algorithms but coverage is not guaranteed.

References