Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-66565

Gofiber Utils ≤ 1.2.0

Published
09 December 2025
Modified
11 December 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 9.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0046 38th percentile
Risk Priority 46 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-66565 is a critical-severity Unchecked Return Value (CWE-252) vulnerability in Gofiber Utils. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Brute Force (T1110); ranked at the 38th 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 SC-12 (Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Fiber Utils is a collection of common functions created for Fiber. In versions 2.0.0-rc.3 and below, when the system's cryptographic random number generator (crypto/rand) fails, both functions silently fall back to returning predictable UUID values, including the zero UUID "00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000".…

more

The vulnerability occurs through two related but distinct failure paths, both ultimately caused by crypto/rand.Read() failures, compromising the security of all Fiber applications using these functions for security-critical operations. This issue is fixed in version 2.0.0-rc.4.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1110 Brute Force Credential Access
Adversaries may use brute force techniques to gain access to accounts when passwords are unknown or when password hashes are obtained.
T1110.001 Password Guessing Credential Access
Adversaries with no prior knowledge of legitimate credentials within the system or environment may guess passwords to attempt access to accounts.
T1110.002 Password Cracking Credential Access
Adversaries may use password cracking to attempt to recover usable credentials, such as plaintext passwords, when credential material such as password hashes are obtained.
T1606 Forge Web Credentials Credential Access
Adversaries may forge credential materials that can be used to gain access to web applications or Internet services.
T1606.001 Web Cookies Credential Access
Adversaries may forge web cookies that can be used to gain access to web applications or Internet services.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-25882Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2025-48075Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2024-22199Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2023-45128Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2026-25891Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2026-30246Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2024-38513Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2026-44332Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2026-42554Same vendor: Gofiber
CVE-2023-45141Same vendor: Gofiber

Affected Assets

gofiber
utils
2.0.0 · ≤ 1.2.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 9 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V6.5.2
  • V11.3.4
  • V7.2.3
  • V11.5.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Requiring specific approved cryptography for protection directly mandates use of strong PRNGs instead of weak ones.

Developer testing and code evaluation can discover instances where return values are ignored.

Key establishment and management requirements force use of approved RNG sources with adequate entropy when generating keys.

Requiring a documented development process and coding standards can mandate explicit checking of all function return values.

Security engineering principles can include selection of strong entropy sources during design.

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 SDLC practices directly require checking and handling all function return values to detect error conditions.

PR.AA-03 partial match
prevents

Password-strength policies implicitly require sufficient entropy, but the control addresses authentication rather than algorithmic randomness.

PR.DS-01 partial match
prevents

Proper encryption for data-at-rest requires sufficient entropy for keys/nonces; eliminating the weakness therefore supports but does not fully realize the control.

PR.DS-02 partial match
prevents

Cryptographic protection of data-in-transit depends on adequate entropy; the weakness directly undermines the control's effectiveness.

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.

prevents

Mandates use of cryptography that must rely on sufficient entropy sources.

finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect missing return-value checks.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates verification of return values to prevent undetected failures.

prevents

Application security requirements include input/output validation and error handling that covers return-value checks.

degrades

Secure system architecture and engineering principles require robust error handling and defensive coding practices.

prevents

Secure coding explicitly requires checking return values to avoid CWE-252.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
  • V-248524 OL 8 must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-331
  • V-248563 The OL 8 SSH server must be configured to use strong entropy. prevents CWE-331, CWE-338
RHEL 7 (1 rule)
  • V-204497 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: to provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-331
RHEL 8 (2 rules)
  • V-230223 RHEL 8 must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect data requiring data-at-rest protections in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-331
  • V-230253 RHEL 8 must ensure the SSH server uses strong entropy. prevents CWE-338
Ubuntu 22.04 (1 rule)
  • V-260650 Ubuntu 22.04 LTS must implement NIST FIPS-validated cryptography to protect classified information and for the following: To provision digital signatures, to generate cryptographic hashes, and to protect unclassified information requiring confidentiality and cryptographic protection in accordance with applicable federal laws, Executive Orders, directives, policies, regulations, and standards. prevents CWE-338

References