BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-4366High confidence

Request Smuggling Vulnerability in Pingora

Unknown · Unknown

7.4HighCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2025-16165

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Fix not verified
01

What, why and how

A request smuggling vulnerability identified within Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, allows malicious HTTP requests to be injected via manipulated request bodies on cache HITs, leading to unauthorized request execution and potential cache poisoning. Fixed in:  https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff Impact: The issue could lead to request smuggling in cases where Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, is used for caching allowing an attacker to manipulate headers and URLs in subsequent requests made on the same HTTP/1.1 connection.

What

A request smuggling vulnerability identified within Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, allows malicious HTTP requests to be injected via manipulated request bodies on cache HITs, leading to unauthorized request execution and potential cache poisoning. Fixed in:  https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff Impact: The issue could lead to request smuggling in cases where Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, is used for caching allowing an attacker to manipulate headers and URLs in subsequent requests made on the same HTTP/1.1 connection.

Why

The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

A request smuggling vulnerability identified within Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, allows malicious HTTP requests to be injected via manipulated request bodies on cache HITs, leading to unauthorized request execution and potential cache poisoning. Fixed in:  https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff https://github.com/cloudflare/pingora/commit/fda3317ec822678564d641e7cf1c9b77ee3759ff Impact: The issue could lead to request smuggling in cases where Pingora’s proxying framework, pingora-proxy, is used for caching allowing an attacker to manipulate headers and URLs in subsequent requests made on the same HTTP/1.1 connection.

Why

The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
Active interaction required
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-444 ↗

CWE-444: Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling'). The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIActiveUser interaction: A user must take a deliberate action for exploitation to succeed.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCLowSubsequent-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SILowSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-444
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix not verified
Affected
< 0.5.0
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 22 May 2025 · Last source change 18 Jun 2025, 13:46 UTC · CWE-444 · Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests ('HTTP Request/Response Smuggling')

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-16165
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched

Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-16165↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2025-4366 · cve.blacktree.nl