CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2025-59532NVD status: Deferred

Codex CLI is a coding agent from OpenAI that runs locally.

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2025-59532 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in codex from OpenAI, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.6 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, but only if a user takes part, for example by opening a link or file. Affected codex versions: >= 0.2.0, < 0.39.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.89% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 60% of scored CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of codex you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Because the attack needs a user to take part, warn users about unexpected links and files related to this product until it is patched.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Openaicodex>= 0.2.0, < 0.39.0Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
PassiveA user only needs to do something routine, such as viewing a page.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official description

Codex CLI is a coding agent from OpenAI that runs locally. In versions 0.2.0 to 0.38.0, due to a bug in the sandbox configuration logic, Codex CLI could treat a model-generated cwd as the sandbox’s writable root, including paths outside of the folder where the user started their session. This logic bypassed the intended workspace boundary and enables arbitrary file writes and command execution where the Codex process has permissions - this did not impact the network-disabled sandbox restriction. This issue has been patched in Codex CLI 0.39.0 that canonicalizes and validates that the boundary used for sandbox policy is based on where the user started the session, and not the one generated by the model. Users running 0.38.0 or earlier should update immediately via their package manager or by reinstalling the latest Codex CLI to ensure sandbox boundaries are enforced. If using the Codex IDE extension, users should immediately update to 0.4.12 for a fix of the sandbox issue.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation

The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
  • Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
  • Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.

More Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-20)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.