Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
CVE-2025-61301 can make CAPEv2 malware sandbox reports incomplete or missing when a submitted sample creates unusually large or deeply nested behavior data. The business risk is blind spots in malware analysis, not direct system takeover. Sources do not show active exploitation or a named patch.
Executive priority
Treat this as a high-priority reliability and detection-confidence issue for malware analysis operations. It can reduce analyst visibility and allow malicious samples to avoid complete reporting, but the supplied evidence does not show data theft, privilege escalation, or active exploitation.
Technical view
The issue affects CAPEv2 reporting paths in reporting/mongodb.py and reporting/jsondump.py. Oversized or deeply nested behavior data can hit MongoDB BSON limits or orjson recursion failures, causing report generation failure. The CVE is scored CVSS 7.5 high for availability impact and maps to CWE-400 resource consumption.
Likely exposure
Exposure is most likely in CAPEv2 environments that accept untrusted or external sample submissions and rely on MongoDB or JSON report output for behavioral analysis. The source bundle does not identify affected versions, packages, or CPEs beyond CAPEv2 and the referenced commit context.
Exploitation context
The CVE describes attacker-controlled sample execution inside the sandbox producing pathological behavior data. KEV is false, and the provided sources do not state active exploitation. Public references include a CVE-specific GitHub repository, but no exploitation status should be inferred from that alone.
Researcher notes
Evidence is limited to the CVE metadata and referenced repositories. The affected version range and remediation commit are not named in the source bundle. Focus validation on report-generation failure modes, sample intake trust boundaries, and whether CAPEv2 has published a fix after the referenced commit.
Mitigation direction
- Check CAPEv2 upstream guidance and issues for an official fix or configuration workaround.
- Restrict sample submission access to trusted users or controlled intake pipelines where possible.
- Apply size, depth, and runtime guardrails if supported by your CAPEv2 deployment.
- Monitor failed MongoDB and JSON reporting jobs for BSON limit or recursion errors.
- Preserve raw task artifacts when report generation fails to reduce analysis loss.
Validation and detection
- Inventory CAPEv2 instances that accept untrusted sample submissions.
- Confirm whether MongoDB or jsondump reporting is enabled in each deployment.
- Review recent analysis jobs for missing behavior reports or reporting exceptions.
- Check logs for BSON size limit failures or orjson recursion failures.
- Track upstream CAPEv2 commits and advisories related to reporting robustness.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-400: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2025-61301 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- High
- CVSS
- 7.5 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
1 official scoreWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H3.93.6CISA-ADPVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 3.1 score
7.5HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- https://github.com/kevoreilly/CAPEv2CVE reference, mitre
- https://github.com/eGkritsis/CVE-2025-61301CVE reference, mitre
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
Uncontrolled Resource Consumption represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.