Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-64108

RCE in Anysphere Cursor ≤ 2.0

Published
04 November 2025
Modified
10 November 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0045 37th percentile
Risk Priority 64 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-64108 is a high-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Anysphere Cursor. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 37th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Enterprise AI Assistants; in the LLM/Generative AI Risks risk domain.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — 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-2025-64108 is a high-severity vulnerability (CVSS v3.1 score of 8.8) in Cursor, an AI-powered code editor for programming, affecting versions 1.7.44 and below. It arises from various NTFS path quirks (mapped to CWE-22: Path Traversal and CWE-94: Code Injection) that allow a prompt injection attacker to circumvent protections on sensitive files, enabling overwrites of files that normally require human approval. Modifying certain protected files can lead to remote code execution (RCE). The flaw is limited to systems supporting NTFS.

Exploitation requires chaining with a prompt injection or malicious model attachment. An attacker with low privileges (PR:L) can trigger it over the network (AV:N) with low attack complexity (AC:L) and no user interaction (UI:N), potentially achieving high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C:H/I:H/A:H) through RCE.

Cursor has addressed the issue in version 2.0. Additional details are available in the GitHub security advisory at https://github.com/cursor/cursor/security/advisories/GHSA-6r98-6qcw-rxrw.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions 1.7.44 and below, various NTFS path quirks allow a prompt injection attacker to circumvent sensitive file protections and overwrite files which Cursor requires human approval to overwrite. Modification…

more

of some of the protected files can lead to RCE. Must be chained with a prompt injection or malicious model attach. Only affects systems supporting NTFS. This issue is fixed in version 2.0.

CWE(s)

AI Security AnalysisAI

AI Category
Enterprise AI Assistants
Risk Domain
LLM/Generative AI Risks
OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
None mapped
Classification Reason
Matched keywords: ai, prompt injection

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.002 AppleScript Execution
Adversaries may abuse AppleScript for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.005 Visual Basic Execution
Adversaries may abuse Visual Basic (VB) for execution.
T1059.006 Python Execution
Adversaries may abuse Python commands and scripts for execution.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-61590Same product: Anysphere Cursor
CVE-2025-61593Same product: Anysphere Cursor
CVE-2026-22708Same product: Anysphere Cursor
CVE-2025-59041Shared CWE-94
CVE-2024-12652Shared CWE-94
CVE-2025-53927Shared CWE-94
CVE-2025-10875Shared CWE-94
CVE-2025-23304Shared CWE-22, CWE-94
CVE-2024-52959Shared CWE-94
CVE-2026-45261Shared CWE-94

Affected Assets

anysphere
cursor
≤ 2.0

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)
  • V5.3.2
  • V1.3.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.

Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.

Input validation directly neutralizes special path elements before pathname construction occurs.

Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.

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 mostly match
prevents

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.PS-02 partial match
prevents

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 none match
prevents

PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.

PR.DS-10 none match
prevents

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.

finds

Security testing in development catches path traversal via static/dynamic analysis.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path sanitization that directly prevent path traversal.

prevents

Application security requirements include rules for safe file handling and canonicalization.

prevents

Secure architecture principles require least-privilege file access and directory isolation.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe path construction and mandate safe APIs.

mitigates

Information access restriction limits which files an application may read or write.

References