CVE-2025-58762: Tautulli vulnerable to Authenticated Remote Code Execution via write primitive and `Script` notification agent
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 28/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.82% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 57.4% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. Administrator privileges are required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: Tautulli Tautulli 2.16.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Tautulli Tautulli 2.16.0 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Tautulli is a Python based monitoring and tracking tool for Plex Media Server. In Tautulli v2.15.3 and earlier, an attacker with administrative access can use the `pms_image_proxy` endpoint to write arbitrary python scripts into the application filesystem. This leads to remote code execution when combined with the `Script` notification agent. If an attacker with administrative access changes the URL of the PMS to a server they control, they can then abuse the `pms_image_proxy` to obtain a file write into the application filesystem. This can be done by making a `pms_image_proxy` request with a URL in the `img` parameter and the desired file name in the `img_format` parameter. Tautulli then uses a hash of the desired metadata together with the `img_format` in order to construct a file path. Since the attacker controls `img_format` which occupies the end of the file path, and `img_format` is not sanitised, the attacker can then use path traversal characters to specify filename of their choosing. If the specified file does not exist, Tautaulli will then attempt to fetch the image from the configured PMS. Since the attacker controls the PMS, they can return arbitrary content in response to this request, which will then be written into the specified file. An attacker can write an arbitrary python script into a location on the application file system. The attacker can then make use of the built-in `Script` notification agent to run the local script, obtaining remote code execution on the application server. Users should upgrade to version 2.16.0 to receive a patch.
- Published
- Sep 9, 2025
- Updated
- Oct 19, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.8% · 57th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-73
Report tools
Action score
28
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 28 / 40 · 7.2 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.8%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 7.2
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 9.1
- 1.9 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| tautulli | tautulli | cpe:2.3:a:tautulli:tautulli |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- tautulli tautullibefore 2.16.0
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Tautulli Tautulli
- < 2.16.0affected
Same product
tautulli: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-19833In Tautulli 2.1.9, CSRF in the /shutdown URI allows an attacker to shut down the remote media server.60This week
- CVE-2026-43986Tautulli vulnerable to unauthenticated SSRF in /image/<hash> via attacker-seeded image hash replay39Monitor
- CVE-2026-43985Taultulli has CSRF in /configUpdate via missing anti-CSRF and method restriction that allows admin credential takeover35Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-58760Sep 9, 2025 · Tautulli vulnerable to Unauthenticated Path Traversal in `/image` endpoint30Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-58761Sep 9, 2025 · Tautulli vulnerable to Unauthenticated Path Traversal in `real_pms_image_proxy`30Monitor
- Later →CVE-2025-58763Sep 9, 2025 · Tautulli vulnerable to Authenticated Remote Code Execution via Command Injection29Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Tautulli Tautulli | 2.16.0 · description | Vendor (CNA) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
—
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
- CVE-2025-587600 days apartTautulli vulnerable to Unauthenticated Path Traversal in `/image` endpoint30Monitor
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-73 · External Control of File Name or PathCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
- Leverage Alternate EncodingCAPEC-267likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-64likelihood: High · High
- URL EncodingCAPEC-72likelihood: High · High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-78likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-79likelihood: High · High
- Using UTF-8 Encoding to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-80likelihood: High · High
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.