Skip to content

CVE-2025-58180

OS Command Injection: Is CVE-2025-58180 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

Community verdict: No field verdicts yet. Be the first practitioner to weigh in.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
8.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
21%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-78 · OS Command Injection
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

OctoPrint provides a web interface for controlling consumer 3D printers. OctoPrint versions up until and including 1.11.2 contain a vulnerability that allows an authenticated attacker to upload a file under a specially crafted filename that will allow arbitrary command execution if said filename becomes included in a command defined in a system event handler and said event gets triggered. If no event handlers executing system commands with uploaded filenames as parameters have been configured, this vulnerability does not have an impact. The vulnerability is patched in version 1.11.3. As a workaround, OctoPrint administrators who have event handlers configured that include any kind of filename based placeholders should disable those by setting their `enabled` property to `False` or unchecking the "Enabled" checkbox in the GUI based Event Manager. Alternatively, OctoPrint administrators should set `feature.enforceReallyUniversalFilenames` to `true` in `config.yaml` and restart OctoPrint, then vet the existing uploads and make sure to delete any suspicious looking files. As always, OctoPrint administrators are advised to not expose OctoPrint on hostile networks like the public internet, and to vet who has access to their instance.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-58180
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-58180/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-58180)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-58180"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-58180/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-58180"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-78 · OS Command Injection.