⚠️ CVE-2025-25427: A Stored cross-site scripting ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-3509: A Remote Code Execution (RCE) ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-3246: An improper neutralization of ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3124: A missing authorization vulner... 🟢 CVE-2024-42178: HCL MyXalytics is affected by ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3765: A vulnerability, which was cla... 🟡 CVE-2025-3764: A vulnerability classified as ... 🟢 CVE-2024-42177: HCL MyXalytics is affected by ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3763: A vulnerability classified as ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3762: A vulnerability was found in P... 🟡 CVE-2025-29722: A CSRF vulnerability in Commer... 🟡 CVE-2025-28101: An arbitrary file deletion vul... 🔥 CVE-2025-28009: A SQL Injection vulnerability ... 🟢 CVE-2025-26269: DragonflyDB Dragonfly through ... 🟢 CVE-2025-26268: DragonflyDB Dragonfly before 1... ⚠️ CVE-2024-55211: An issue in Think Router Tk-Rt... 🟢 CVE-2021-47671: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47670: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47669: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47668: In the Linux kernel, the follo... 🟢 CVE-2025-32415: In libxml2 before 2.13.8 and 2... ⚠️ CVE-2025-2947: IBM i 7.6  contains a privile... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29661: Litepubl CMS <= 7.0.9 is vulne... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29181: FOXCMS <= V1.25 is vulnerable ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29180: In FOXCMS <=1.25, the installd... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29039: An issue in dlink DIR 832x 240... ⚠️ CVE-2025-43015: In JetBrains RubyMine before 2... 🟡 CVE-2025-43014: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🟡 CVE-2025-43013: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... ⚠️ CVE-2025-43012: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🟡 CVE-2025-42921: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🔥 CVE-2025-39596: Weak Authentication vulnerabil... 🔥 CVE-2025-39595: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39594: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🔥 CVE-2025-39588: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-39587: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39586: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39583: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🟡 CVE-2025-39580: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39569: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39568: Improper Limitation of a Pathn... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39567: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39562: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39559: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39558: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39554: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🔥 CVE-2025-39551: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-39550: Deserialization of Untrusted D... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39542: Incorrect Privilege Assignment... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39535: Authentication Bypass Using an... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39533: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39532: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39527: Deserialization of Untrusted D... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39526: Improper Control of Filename f... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39521: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39519: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39464: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39462: Improper Control of Filename f... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39461: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39457: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🟡 CVE-2025-39456: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39455: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39453: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39452: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39444: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39443: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39442: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39441: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39440: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39439: Exposure of Sensitive System I... 🟡 CVE-2025-39438: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39437: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🔥 CVE-2025-39436: Unrestricted Upload of File wi... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39435: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39434: Authorization Bypass Through U... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39433: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39432: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39431: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39430: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39429: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39428: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39427: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39426: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39425: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39424: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39423: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39422: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39421: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39420: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39419: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39418: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39417: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39416: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39415: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39414: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32686: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-32682: Unrestricted Upload of File wi... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32674: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32670: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32666: Improper Neutralization of Inp...
Malicious Go Package Backdoor Remains Undetected for Over Three Years

Malicious Go Package Backdoor Remains Undetected for Over Three Years

In a significant software supply chain security incident, a malicious Go package impersonating the widely-used BoltDB database module remained undetected for more than three years, potentially compromising numerous systems.

Discovery of the Malicious Package

Security researchers from Socket Security uncovered a backdoored typosquat of the BoltDB package. The legitimate BoltDB, hosted at github.com/boltdb/bolt, is a popular key/value store for Go. The malicious actor created a similarly named package at github.com/boltdb-go/bolt, aiming to deceive developers into downloading the compromised version.

Mechanism of the Attack

The attacker exploited Go's module proxy caching mechanism. After publishing the malicious package, it was cached by the Go Module Mirror service, which stores modules indefinitely to enhance reliability. Subsequently, the attacker altered the Git tags in the repository to point to a clean version, making manual inspection appear benign. However, developers fetching the package via the Go Module Proxy continued to receive the cached malicious version, facilitating persistent distribution of the backdoored code.

Impact and Implications

The backdoored package contained a backdoor that enabled remote code execution, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary commands on infected systems. While the exact number of affected developers is unclear, the incident underscores the risks associated with typosquatting and the challenges posed by immutable caching mechanisms in package management systems.

Recommendations for Developers

To mitigate such risks, developers are advised to:

  • Verify package names and sources carefully before inclusion in projects.
  • Regularly audit dependencies for any unauthorized or suspicious changes.
  • Utilize security tools designed to detect malicious packages and typosquatting attempts.

Staying vigilant and implementing robust security practices are essential to safeguard against supply chain attacks in the software development ecosystem.

Sources

Back to Posts