CVE-2025-46835 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-46835
Vulnerability Scoring

8.5
/10
Severe Risk

Cybersecurity professionals consider CVE-2025-46835 an immediate threat requiring urgent mitigation.

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity: Low
    Exploits can be performed without significant complexity or special conditions.
  • Attack Vector: Local
    Vulnerability requires local system access.
  • Privileges Required: None
    No privileges are required for exploitation.
  • Scope: Changed
    Successful exploitation can impact components beyond the vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: Required
    User interaction is necessary for successful exploitation.

CVE-2025-46835 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕐 15 Jul 2025, 13:24 UTC
Originally published on: 🕒 10 Jul 2025, 15:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 4 days

CVSS Release: version 3

CVSS3 Source

security-advisories@github.com

CVSS3 Type

Secondary

CVSS3 Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L

CVE-2025-46835 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-46835: Git GUI allows you to use the Git source control management tools via a GUI. When a user clones an untrusted repository and is tricked into editing a file located in a maliciously named directory in the repository, then Git GUI can create and overwrite files for which the user has write permission. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.43.7, 2.44.4, 2.45.4, 2.46.4, 2.47.3, 2.48.2, 2.49.1, and 2.50.1.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-46835

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-46835 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2025-46835

With low attack complexity and no required privileges, CVE-2025-46835 is an easy target for cybercriminals. Organizations should prioritize immediate mitigation measures to prevent unauthorized access and data breaches.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-46835, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-46835, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: High
    Exploiting CVE-2025-46835 can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, severely compromising data privacy.
  • Integrity: High
    CVE-2025-46835 could allow unauthorized modifications to data, potentially affecting system reliability and trust.
  • Availability: Low
    CVE-2025-46835 may slightly degrade system performance without fully affecting service availability.

CVE-2025-46835 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-88

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

  • Parameter Injection CAPEC-137 An adversary manipulates the content of request parameters for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some parameter encodings use text characters as separators. For example, parameters in a HTTP GET message are encoded as name-value pairs separated by an ampersand (&). If an attacker can supply text strings that are used to fill in these parameters, then they can inject special characters used in the encoding scheme to add or modify parameters. For example, if user input is fed directly into an HTTP GET request and the user provides the value "myInput&new_param=myValue", then the input parameter is set to myInput, but a new parameter (new_param) is also added with a value of myValue. This can significantly change the meaning of the query that is processed by the server. Any encoding scheme where parameters are identified and separated by text characters is potentially vulnerable to this attack - the HTTP GET encoding used above is just one example.
  • Flash Parameter Injection CAPEC-174 An adversary takes advantage of improper data validation to inject malicious global parameters into a Flash file embedded within an HTML document. Flash files can leverage user-submitted data to configure the Flash document and access the embedding HTML document.
  • Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads CAPEC-41 This type of attack involves an attacker leveraging meta-characters in email headers to inject improper behavior into email programs. Email software has become increasingly sophisticated and feature-rich. In addition, email applications are ubiquitous and connected directly to the Web making them ideal targets to launch and propagate attacks. As the user demand for new functionality in email applications grows, they become more like browsers with complex rendering and plug in routines. As more email functionality is included and abstracted from the user, this creates opportunities for attackers. Virtually all email applications do not list email header information by default, however the email header contains valuable attacker vectors for the attacker to exploit particularly if the behavior of the email client application is known. Meta-characters are hidden from the user, but can contain scripts, enumerations, probes, and other attacks against the user's system.
  • HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) CAPEC-460 An adversary adds duplicate HTTP GET/POST parameters by injecting query string delimiters. Via HPP it may be possible to override existing hardcoded HTTP parameters, modify the application behaviors, access and, potentially exploit, uncontrollable variables, and bypass input validation checkpoints and WAF rules.
  • OS Command Injection CAPEC-88 In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-46835: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-54792 – LocalSend is an open-source app to securely share files and messages with nearby devices over local networks without needing an internet connection...
  • CVE-2025-54424 – 1Panel is a web interface and MCP Server that manages websites, files, containers, databases, and LLMs on a Linux server. In versions 2.0.5 and bel...
  • CVE-2025-54132 – Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions below 1.3, Mermaid (which is used to render diagrams) allows embedding images wh...
  • CVE-2025-54131 – Cursor is a code editor built for programming with AI. In versions below 1.3, an attacker can bypass the allow list in auto-run mode with a backtic...
  • CVE-2024-13978 – A vulnerability was found in LibTIFF up to 4.7.0. It has been declared as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function t2p_read_tiff...