Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-25153 is a high-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Linuxfoundation Backstage. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 43th 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-2026-25153 is a code injection vulnerability (CWE-94) in the @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node package, a component of the Backstage open framework for building developer portals. It affects versions prior to 1.13.11 and 1.14.1 when TechDocs is configured with `runIn: local`. In this setup, a malicious `mkdocs.yml` file submitted or modified in a repository can exploit MkDocs hooks configuration to execute arbitrary Python code on the TechDocs build server. The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.7 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:L).
An attacker with low privileges (PR:L) who can submit or modify a repository's `mkdocs.yml` file processed by TechDocs can exploit this over the network, though it requires high attack complexity (AC:H). Successful exploitation allows arbitrary Python code execution on the build server, potentially leading to high confidentiality impact, low integrity and availability impacts, and scope change due to server-side execution.
The Backstage security advisory (GHSA-6jr7-99pf-8vgf) recommends upgrading to @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node versions 1.13.11 or 1.14.1, which introduce an allowlist of supported MkDocs configuration keys and remove unsupported ones like `hooks` before generation, logging warnings for removed keys. Users of @techdocs/cli should also upgrade to the latest version incorporating the fixed dependency. Workarounds include switching TechDocs to `runIn: docker` for container isolation (partial mitigation), restricting `mkdocs.yml` modifications to trusted contributors with PR review requirements, or using MkDocs versions below 1.4.0 that lack hooks support; note that building in CI/CD pipelines with @techdocs/cli does not mitigate the issue.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-5004
Vulnerability Data
Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node provides common node.js functionalities for TechDocs. In versions of @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node prior to 1.13.11 and 1.14.1, when TechDocs is configured with `runIn: local`, a malicious actor who can submit or…
more
modify a repository's `mkdocs.yml` file can execute arbitrary Python code on the TechDocs build server via MkDocs hooks configuration. @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node versions 1.13.11 and 1.14.1 contain a fix. The fix introduces an allowlist of supported MkDocs configuration keys. Unsupported configuration keys (including `hooks`) are now removed from `mkdocs.yml` before running the generator, with a warning logged to indicate which keys were removed. Users of `@techdocs/cli` should also upgrade to the latest version, which includes the fixed `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` dependency. Some workarounds are available. Configure TechDocs with `runIn: docker` instead of `runIn: local` to provide container isolation, though it does not fully mitigate the risk. Limit who can modify `mkdocs.yml` files in repositories that TechDocs processes; only allow trusted contributors. Implement PR review requirements for changes to `mkdocs.yml` files to detect malicious `hooks` configurations before they are merged. Use MkDocs < 1.4.0 (e.g., 1.3.1) which does not support hooks. Note: This may limit access to newer MkDocs features. Building documentation in CI/CD pipelines using `@techdocs/cli` does not mitigate this vulnerability, as the CLI uses the same vulnerable `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` package.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.1
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.
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.
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.