Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-65474

Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0 ≤ 2.8.6

Public PoC
Published
11 December 2025
Modified
19 December 2025
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
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:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0053 42th percentile
Risk Priority 71 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-65474 is a critical-severity Use of Incorrectly-Resolved Name or Reference (CWE-706) vulnerability in Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Path Interception (T1034); 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.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-3 (Malicious Code Protection) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — 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-2025-65474 is an arbitrary file rename vulnerability in the /admin/manager.php component of EasyImages 2.0 v2.8.6 and below. The flaw enables attackers to execute arbitrary code by renaming a PHP file to an SVG format. It carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and is linked to CWE-706 and CWE-434.

Unauthenticated attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network with low attack complexity and without requiring user interaction. Successful exploitation grants high-impact access to confidentiality, integrity, and availability, culminating in arbitrary code execution on the targeted system.

Advisories and further details, including potential mitigations or patches, are available at https://congsec.cn?id=20251103234511-9418dk9 and https://gist.github.com/CongSec/3cf968621f71a7da35dcc9b8f0b29bb2.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

An arbitrary file rename vulnerability in the /admin/manager.php component of EasyImages 2.0 v2.8.6 and below allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via renaming a PHP file to a SVG format.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1034 Path Interception Persistence
**This technique has been deprecated.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1505 Server Software Component Persistence
Adversaries may abuse legitimate extensible development features of servers to establish persistent access to systems.
T1505.003 Web Shell Persistence
Adversaries may backdoor web servers with web shells to establish persistent access to systems.
T1574.008 Path Interception by Search Order Hijacking Stealth
Adversaries may execute their own malicious payloads by hijacking the search order used to load other programs.
T1036 Masquerading Stealth
Adversaries may attempt to manipulate features of their artifacts to make them appear legitimate or benign to users and/or security tools.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-65471Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2025-65472Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2023-7098Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2025-65473Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2025-13415Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2023-1181Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2023-33599Same product: Easyimages2.0 Project Easyimages2.0
CVE-2023-31946Shared CWE-434
CVE-2023-25922Shared CWE-434
CVE-2024-49216Shared CWE-434

Affected Assets

easyimages2.0 project
easyimages2.0
≤ 2.8.6

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)
  • V5.1.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Malicious-code protection at entry points blocks dangerous file types from being accepted and executed.

Access enforcement applies authorization checks to the resolved resource, blocking access outside the intended sphere.

Information flow enforcement can constrain flows that result from an incorrectly resolved name or reference.

Least functionality restricts the file types and automatic processing capabilities the system will accept.

SC-18 Mobile Code partial match

Mobile-code controls define, authorize, and block unacceptable uploaded code before automatic processing occurs.

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-05 mostly match
prevents

Restricting execution of unauthorized software directly blocks dangerous uploaded files from running.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure-development practices directly prevent incorrect name/reference resolution bugs during coding.

PR.AA-05 partial match
prevents

Enforced authorization boundaries limit damage from an incorrectly resolved reference.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Logical segmentation and access controls reduce the chance an out-of-sphere resolution succeeds.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Hardened configuration baselines can constrain allowable name-to-resource mappings.

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 can detect incorrect name or reference resolution through fuzzing and negative test cases.

degrades

Network segmentation and routing policies reduce the chance that a mis-resolved name leads to an unintended external resource.

degrades

Segregated networks limit the blast radius when a name or reference resolves outside the intended control sphere.

prevents

Secure SDLC practices include design reviews that can catch incorrect name or reference handling before deployment.

prevents

Application security requirements can mandate validation of all external references and names used at runtime.

prevents

Secure architecture principles discourage reliance on ambient or globally-resolvable names without explicit scoping.

References