Home/CVE/Pyroscope is an open-source continuous profiling database. The database supports various storage backends, including Ten
CVE
CVE-2025-41118
Pyroscope is an open-source continuous profiling database. The database supports various storage backends, including Ten
Pyroscope is an open-source continuous profiling database. The database supports various storage backends, including Tencent Cloud Object Storage (COS). If the database is configured to use Tencent COS as the storage backend, an attacker could extract the secret_key configuration value from the Pyroscope API.
To exploit this vulnerability, an attacker needs direct access to the Pyroscope API. We highly recommend limiting the public internet exposure of all our databases, such that they are only accessible by trusted users or internal systems. This vulnerability is fixed in versions: 1.15.x: 1.15.2 and above. 1.16.x: 1.16.1 and above. 1.17.x: 1.17.0 and above (i.e. all versions).
Thanks to Théo Cusnir for reporting this vulnerability to us via our bug bounty program.
CRITICAL · CVSS 9.1
EPSS 0.00016
Schedule remediation
- SSVC automatable: yes - attacks can be scripted at scale
- CVSS base score ≥ 7.0
Sigma rules0
YARA rules0
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
▸
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2025-41118, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked.
EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal.
CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score.
Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits.
PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).
◆
ATT&CK techniques
9Techniques this CVE enables - linked via CWECAPECATT&CK. High◆ = named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei templates.
T1083 · File and Directory Discovery T1134.001 · Token Impersonation/Theft T1505.005 · Terminal Services DLL T1548 · Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism T1550.004 · Web Session Cookie T1553.002 · Code Signing T1554 · Compromise Host Software Binary T1574.005 · Executable Installer File Permissions Weakness T1574.010 · Services File Permissions Weakness
▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques
▤
CAPEC attack patterns
11Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.
CAPEC-CAPEC-1 · Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs CAPEC-CAPEC-122 · Privilege Abuse CAPEC-CAPEC-127 · Directory Indexing CAPEC-CAPEC-17 · Using Malicious Files CAPEC-CAPEC-180 · Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels CAPEC-CAPEC-206 · Signing Malicious Code CAPEC-CAPEC-234 · Hijacking a privileged process CAPEC-CAPEC-60 · Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay) CAPEC-CAPEC-61 · Session Fixation CAPEC-CAPEC-62 · Cross Site Request Forgery CAPEC-CAPEC-642 · Replace Binaries
⬡
Weakness Classification
▤
Affected Products & Versions
2grafana pyroscope< 1.15.2
grafana pyroscopeall versions
▤
Affected Packages
1Language-ecosystem packages (from OSV) tied to this CVE, with the version that fixes it - the dependency-level detail NVD doesn’t carry.
Go
github.com/grafana/pyroscope
CRITICAL
fixed in 1.15.2
▣
Scoring & Timeline
9.1
CRITICAL · CVSS v3.1 · [email protected]
Attack Vector
Network
Adjacent
Local
Physical
Attack Complexity
Low
High
Privileges Required
None
Low
High
User Interaction
None
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Low
High
Integrity
None
Low
High
Availability
None
Low
High
SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment
Exploitation
none
Automatable
yes
Technical impact
total
SSVC asks the questions that actually drive patch urgency: is it being exploited, can attacks be automated, and how total is the impact.
⚑
Vendor Advisories
1🔗
References & Sources
1Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.