Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-65602 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Chancms Chancms. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Template Injection (T1221); ranked at the 42th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) 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-2025-65602 is a template injection vulnerability in the /vip/v1/file/save component of ChanCMS version 3.3.4. Published on 2025-12-10, it enables attackers to execute arbitrary code through a crafted POST request. The issue 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-94 (code injection) and CWE-1336 (incorrect handling of code blocks in templates).
Any unauthenticated attacker with network access can exploit this vulnerability due to its low attack complexity and lack of requirements for privileges or user interaction. Exploitation via a specially crafted POST request to the affected endpoint results in remote code execution, providing high-impact access to compromise confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the targeted ChanCMS instance.
Advisories and further details are available in the ChanCMS repository at https://gitee.com/chancms/ChanCMS and the Notion page describing the unauthenticated RCE at https://www.notion.so/ChanCMS-Unauthenticated-RCE-2a3ee9235ba380fc9973e16c06258689.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-202628
Vulnerability Data
A template injection vulnerability in the /vip/v1/file/save component of ChanCMS v3.3.4 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted POST request.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2V1.3.7V1.3.10V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
Security engineering principles require use of safe templating APIs and proper escaping of external input.
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'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.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.
Security testing can detect template-injection flaws but does not itself implement neutralization controls.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and sanitization that directly prevents template-injection weaknesses.
Application security requirements explicitly call for neutralizing special elements in template engines.
Secure architecture principles reduce the likelihood of unsafe template processing but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.
Banning unapproved code samples and unauthenticated web services, combined with secure-coding standards and SAST, prevents the dynamic generation or inclusion of attacker-supplied code.
Controls that restrict unauthorized or malicious code from being introduced via external networks or removable media limit opportunities for an attacker to inject and execute arbitrary code.