CVE Intelligence
High Injection

CVE-2026-25153 — @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node vulnerable to arbitrary code execution via MkDocs hooks

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 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.

Published Jan 30, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.6% (30-day exploitation probability)+7
  • 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.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.62%
ahead of 48% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
@backstage
Backstage
CVSS base
8.8
High · 4 source(s)

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.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

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.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (@backstage Backstage, Linuxfoundation Backstage).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. 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.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
@backstage Backstage version < 1.13.11version = 1.14.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Linuxfoundation Backstage < 1.13.11≥ 1.14.0 and < 1.14.1 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
8.8 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 5.9 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.7 CVSS 3.1 High 1.8 5.3 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.7 CVSS 3.1 High 1.8 5.3 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.7 CVSS 3.1 High — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
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)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 8.8 (NVD (NIST)) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-94 · Code Injection

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.62%

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.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsendpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · backstage/backstage
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 8.8
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Undergoing Analysis
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jan 30, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

6 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

@backstage
every CVE for this vendor
Injection
same class
CWE-94
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-106495 Backstage: Improper access control in backend action invocation 3d
  • CVE-2026-106557 Backstage: Improper input validation in TechDocs Markdown extension configuration 8d
  • CVE-2026-106560 Backstage: Improper repository path validation in a Scaffolder backend module 8d
  • CVE-2026-106562 Backstage: Incorrect authorization in search engine permission filtering 8d
  • CVE-2026-106559 Backstage: Improper input validation in Confluence to Markdown scaffolder module 8d
  • CVE-2026-106561 Backstage: Sensitive information disclosure in Kubernetes resource queries 8d

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 fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • 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-2026-25153 is "@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node vulnerable to arbitrary code execution via MkDocs hooks", rated High. It affects Backstage (@backstage); 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 0.62% 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.