CVE-2026-25645
Is CVE-2026-25645 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.
scanner noise
anonymous, aggregated from real reports · via Denoizr| Scanner | Flagged in | Turned out noise |
|---|---|---|
| Mend | 2 scans | 0% |
How often this CVE was flagged by each scanner and how much turned out to be noise (false positives), aggregated anonymously from de-noised reports. Higher noise means the alert is more often not a real risk — verify your exposure.
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:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Requests is a HTTP library. Prior to version 2.33.0, the `requests.utils.extract_zipped_paths()` utility function uses a predictable filename when extracting files from zip archives into the system temporary directory. If the target file already exists, it is reused without validation. A local attacker with write access to the temp directory could pre-create a malicious file that would be loaded in place of the legitimate one. Standard usage of the Requests library is not affected by this vulnerability. Only applications that call `extract_zipped_paths()` directly are impacted. Starting in version 2.33.0, the library extracts files to a non-deterministic location. If developers are unable to upgrade, they can set `TMPDIR` in their environment to a directory with restricted write access.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-25645)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-25645"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-25645/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-25645"></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 verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
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.
- 0
No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.