Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
- EPSS is 0.73% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-46818High confidence
Redis: Authenticated users can execute LUA scripts as a different user
redis · redis
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-QRV7-WCRX-Q5JP ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
6.0MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Low, lowered one band.downgradedsince 3 Oct 2025
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs redis redis and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
19 package statesRelease-specific package status
Alpine, Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · community | redict | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 7.3.6-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 11 Sep 2026 |
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · community | redis | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 8.2.2-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 11 Sep 2026 |
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · main | valkey | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 8.1.4-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Alpine v3.22v3.22 · community | redict | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 7.3.6-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 11 Sep 2026 |
| Alpine v3.22v3.22 · community | redis | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 8.0.4-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 11 Sep 2026 |
| Alpine v3.22v3.22 · main | valkey | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 8.1.4-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Alpine v3.21v3.21 · community | redis | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 7.2.11-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 19 Aug 2026 |
| Alpine v3.21v3.21 · main | valkey | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 7.2.11-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Debian trixietrixie · source | redis | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 5:8.0.2-3+deb13u1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian trixietrixie · source | valkey | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 8.1.1+dfsg1-3+deb13u1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | redis | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 5:7.0.15-1~deb12u6 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | redict | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 7.3.6+ds-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | redis | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 5:8.0.4-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | valkey | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 8.1.4+dfsg1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | redict | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 7.3.6+ds-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | redis | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 5:8.0.4-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | valkey | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 8.1.4+dfsg1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | redis | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | valkey | Vendor fix publishedCanonical reports that a fixed source package version has been published. Repository candidate availability is not checked by BlackTree. | 7.2.11+dfsg1-0ubuntu0.2 | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
SEVD-2026-013-01 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 2.0.0 · finalSchneider Electric CPCERTMultiple Third-Party Vulnerabilities on ProLeiT Plant iT/Brewmaxx
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- ProLeiT Plant iT/Brewmaxx Version 9.60 and above
- Summary
- Additional information about CVE-2025-46818 can be found here: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-46818
- Remediation
- Patch ProLeiT-2025-001 includes a fix to reduce the risk of exploit: • Install the patch to disable the eval commands in Redis on: o Application Server o VisuHub o Engineering Workstations o Workstation with emergency mode functionality • The patch ProLeiT-2025-001 is available via ProLeiT Support: https://www.proleit.com/support/ • Force usage of secure Redis configuration templates in system settings as documented in the patch manual. • Restart all patched Servers and Workstations
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. Versions 8.2.1 and below allow an authenticated user to use a specially crafted Lua script to manipulate different LUA objects and potentially run their own code in the context of another user. The problem exists in all versions of Redis with LUA scripting. This issue is fixed in version 8.2.2. A workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent users from executing LUA scripts. This can be done using ACL to block a script by restricting both the EVAL and FUNCTION command families.
What
Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. Versions 8.2.1 and below allow an authenticated user to use a specially crafted Lua script to manipulate different LUA objects and potentially run their own code in the context of another user. The problem exists in all versions of Redis with LUA scripting. This issue is fixed in version 8.2.2. A workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent users from executing LUA scripts. This can be done using ACL to block a script by restricting both the EVAL and FUNCTION command families.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
Redis is an open source, in-memory database that persists on disk. Versions 8.2.1 and below allow an authenticated user to use a specially crafted Lua script to manipulate different LUA objects and potentially run their own code in the context of another user. The problem exists in all versions of Redis with LUA scripting. This issue is fixed in version 8.2.2. A workaround to mitigate the problem without patching the redis-server executable is to prevent users from executing LUA scripts. This can be done using ACL to block a script by restricting both the EVAL and FUNCTION command families.
Why
Untrusted data can cross into a code-evaluation path and be interpreted as executable instructions.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. 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 No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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
- local access → Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- Required interaction required
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-94 ↗
CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection'). The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
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. - Patch available
- Action
- Patch ProLeiT-2025-001 includes a fix to reduce the risk of exploit: • Install the patch to disable the eval commands in Redis on: o Application Server o VisuHub o Engineering Workstations o Workstation with emergency mode functionality • The patch ProLeiT-2025-001 is available via ProLeiT Support: https://www.proleit.com/support/ • Force usage of secure Redis configuration templates in system settings as documented in the patch manual. • Restart all patched Servers and Workstations
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 3 Oct 2025 · Last source change 3 Oct 2025, 19:14 UTC · CWE-94 · Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-33201
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Schneider Electric CPCERT
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Schneider Electric CPCERT
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
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.