Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-8356 is a critical-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Xerox Freeflow Core. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 4% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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.
Xerox FreeFlow Core version 8.0.4 contains a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) that also enables code injection (CWE-94). The flaw permits an attacker to access arbitrary files on the underlying server and ultimately execute commands, reflected in its CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8 with network attack vector, no authentication, and full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the issue over the network to read sensitive files and achieve remote code execution, allowing them to run arbitrary commands on the affected system without user interaction.
The vendor’s security bulletin for FreeFlow Core 8.0.5 addresses the vulnerability, and a technical write-up from Horizon3 details how the issue progressed from a support ticket to public disclosure as a zero-day. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0478 with no material increase observed after publication.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-23999
Vulnerability Data
In Xerox FreeFlow Core version 8.0.4, an attacker can exploit a Path Traversal vulnerability to access unauthorized files on the server. This can lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE), allowing the attacker to run arbitrary commands on the system.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2V1.3.1
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'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).
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 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
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 in development catches path traversal via static/dynamic analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path sanitization that directly prevent path traversal.
Application security requirements include rules for safe file handling and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles require least-privilege file access and directory isolation.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe path construction and mandate safe APIs.
Information access restriction limits which files an application may read or write.