CVE-2025-54123 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-54123 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-54123: Hoverfly is an open source API simulation tool. In versions 1.11.3 and prior, the middleware functionality in Hoverfly is vulnerable to command injection vulnerability at `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware` endpoint due to insufficient validation and sanitization in user input. The vulnerability exists in the middleware management API endpoint `/api/v2/hoverfly/middleware`. This issue is born due to combination of three code level flaws: Insufficient Input Validation in middleware.go line 94-96; Unsafe Command Execution in local_middleware.go line 14-19; and Immediate Execution During Testing in hoverfly_service.go line 173. This allows an attacker to gain remote code execution (RCE) on any system running the vulnerable Hoverfly service. Since the input is directly passed to system commands without proper checks, an attacker can upload a malicious payload or directly execute arbitrary commands (including reverse shells) on the host server with the privileges of the Hoverfly process. Commit 17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40 in version 1.12.0 disables the set middleware API by default, and subsequent changes to documentation make users aware of the security changes of exposing the set middleware API.

CVE-2025-54123 References

External References

• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/hoverfly_service.go#L173
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/local_middleware.go#L13
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/blob/master/core/middleware/middleware.go#L93
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/17e60a9bc78826deb4b782dca1c1abd3dbe60d40
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/commit/a9d4da7bd7269651f54542ab790d0c613d568d3e
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/advisories/GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf
• https://github.com/SpectoLabs/hoverfly/security/advisories/GHSA-r4h8-hfp2-ggmf

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

• Command Line Execution through SQL Injection CAPEC-108 An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
• Command Delimiters CAPEC-15 An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or denylist input validation, as opposed to allowlist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or denylist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
• Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers CAPEC-43 An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
• Argument Injection CAPEC-6 An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
• 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.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

• CVE-2025-59052 – Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Angular uses a ...
• CVE-2025-10216 – A vulnerability was detected in GrandNode up to 2.3.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /checkout/ConfirmOrder/ of the compo...
• CVE-2025-54376 – Hoverfly is an open source API simulation tool. In versions 1.11.3 and prior, Hoverfly’s admin WebSocket endpoint /api/v2/ws/logs is not protected ...
• CVE-2025-43783 – Reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Liferay Portal 7.4.3.73 through 7.4.3.128, and Liferay DXP 2024.Q3.0 through 2024.Q3.1, 2024....
• CVE-2025-10211 – A security vulnerability has been detected in yanyutao0402 ChanCMS 3.3.0. The affected element is the function CollectController of the file /cms/c...