Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-66407 is a medium-severity CSRF (CWE-352) vulnerability in Weblate Weblate. Its CVSS base score is 5.0 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 16th 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-203462
Vulnerability Data
Weblate is a web based localization tool. The Create Component functionality in Weblate allows authorized users to add new translation components by specifying both a version control system and a source code repository URL to pull from. However, prior to…
more
version 5.15, the repository URL field is not validated or sanitized, allowing an attacker to supply arbitrary protocols, hostnames, and IP addresses, including localhost, internal network addresses, and local filenames. When the Mercurial version control system is selected, Weblate exposes the full server-side HTTP response for the provided URL. This effectively creates a server-side request forgery (SSRF) primitive that can probe internal services and return their contents. In addition to accessing internal HTTP endpoints, the behavior also enables local file enumeration by attempting file:// requests. While file contents may not always be returned, the application’s error messages clearly differentiate between files that exist and files that do not, revealing information about the server’s filesystem layout. In cloud environments, this behavior is particularly dangerous, as internal-only endpoints such as cloud metadata services may be accessible, potentially leading to credential disclosure and full environment compromise. This has been addressed in the Weblate 5.15 release. As a workaround, remove Mercurial from `VCS_BACKENDS`; the Git backend is not affected. The Git backend was already configured to block the file protocol and does not expose the HTTP response content in the error message.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V3.3.2V3.5.1V10.2.1V1.3.6
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
Access enforcement requires verifying that state-changing requests originate from the authenticated user rather than a forged cross-site source.
Protecting session authenticity prevents attackers from replaying or forging authenticated requests via the victim's browser.
Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF 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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require anti-CSRF controls such as tokens or SameSite attributes.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
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.
Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.
By denying access to phishing or malicious sites, the control lowers the likelihood that a user will be tricked into submitting a forged request that performs an unintended action on another site.