CVE-2025-58180 — OctoPrint is Vulnerable to RCE Attacks via Unsanitized Filename in File Upload
OctoPrint provides a web interface for controlling consumer 3D printers. OctoPrint versions up until and including 1.11.2 contain a vulnerability that allows an authenticated attacker to upload a file under a specially crafted filename that will allow arbitrary command execution if said filename becomes included in a command defined in a system event handler and said event gets triggered. If no event handlers executing system commands with uploaded filenames as parameters have been configured, this vulnerability does not have an impact. The vulnerability is patched in version 1.11.3. As a workaround, OctoPrint administrators who have event handlers configured that include any kind of filename based placeholders should disable those by setting their `enabled` property to `False` or unchecking the "Enabled" checkbox in the GUI based Event Manager. Alternatively, OctoPrint administrators should set `feature.enforceReallyUniversalFilenames` to `true` in `config.yaml` and restart OctoPrint, then vet the existing uploads and make sure to delete any suspicious looking files. As always, OctoPrint administrators are advised to not expose OctoPrint on hostile networks like the public internet, and to vet who has access to their instance.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- Public exploit/PoC (exploitdb)+8
- EPSS 21.4% (30-day exploitation probability)+15
- Technical severity (high)+6
The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.
CISA SSVC assessment CISA
Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.
Remediation
Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Documented mitigation — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
- Pip OctoPrint: fixed in version 1.11.3 — github.com (GitHub Security Advisories)
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Octoprint Octoprint, Pip OctoPrint).
- Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
- EPSS ahead of 98% of scored CVEs: prioritize it in the patch queue.
- Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (injection), errors and authentication anomalies.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.5 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 7.5 | CVSS 4.0 | High | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | High | 2.8 | 5.9 | nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | High | — | — | GitHub, Inc. via GitHub Security Advisories |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
Public exploits, PoCs and detection templates
Public code that demonstrates or tests the flaw raises the odds of mass exploitation — and Nuclei templates help find vulnerable assets in your environment.
- OctoPrint 1.11.2 - File Upload Feb 4, 2026
Warning: public PoCs are sometimes disguised malware. Use them only for authorized testing in an isolated environment. This portal does not host exploit code — it only points to the sources.
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
- Look for parameters with command/query metacharacters and unexpected child processes of the service.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Fix documented
- Affected products added · pip/octoprint
- Affected products added · octoprint/octoprint
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- Fix documented
- Affected products added · octoprint/octoprint
- CVSS changed · 8.8
- Source status changed · → Analyzed
- Record created in this database
- 2025
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 2× References added · Oct 19, 2026 – Oct 19, 2026
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 19, 2026 – Oct 19, 2026
References
6 on the record
- github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/security/advisories/GHSA-49mj-x8jp-qvfc
- github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/commit/be4201ef58d9a7c03593252398c16eada90a258b
- github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/commit/c3a940962f4658a8e035a00388781b1cbd768841
- nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-58180
- github.com/advisories/GHSA-49mj-x8jp-qvfc
- github.com/OctoPrint/OctoPrint/releases/tag/1.11.3
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-54134 OctoPrint: File exfiltration possible via query parameters on upload endpoints Aug 21, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-35163 OctoPrint: XSS in Suppressed Command Notifications Aug 21, 2026
- Medium CVE-2026-23892 OctoPrint has Timing Side-Channel Vulnerability in API Key Authentication Jan 27, 2026
- Medium CVE-2025-64187 OctoPrint is vulnerable to XSS through Action Command Notifications and Prompts Nov 7, 2025
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record
Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2025-58180 is "OctoPrint is Vulnerable to RCE Attacks via Unsanitized Filename in File Upload", rated High. It affects Octoprint (Octoprint); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.8 describes technical severity. EPSS 21.43% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.
Comments
Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.
No comments yet.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.