CVE-2025-0913 | Inconsistent handling of O_CREATE|O_EXCL on Unix and Windows in os in syscall

os.OpenFile(path, os.O_CREATE|O_EXCL) behaved differently on Unix and Windows systems when the target path was a dangling symlink. On Unix systems, OpenFile with O_CREATE and O_EXCL flags never follows symlinks. On Windows, when the target path was a symlink to a nonexistent location, OpenFile would create a file in that location. OpenFile now always returns an error when the O_CREATE and O_EXCL flags are both set and the target path is a symlink.

Published: 2025-06-11 Last update: 2025-08-08 Assigner: [email protected] Source: [email protected]
NVD Status：Analyzed，CVE State: published
View at NVD, CVE.org, EUVD

CVE-2025-0913 is rated Low Risk (22.4/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.01%). Monitor for updates and reassess as exploit intelligence or EPSS changes.

Risk is dynamic; we continuously reassess and refresh what is shown on this page as upstream context changes.

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2025-0913

EPSS lead: Daily EPSS estimates relative likelihood of exploitation; percentile ranks this CVE among scored vulnerabilities (higher = more severe relative rank).

# Date Old EPSS score New EPSS score Delta (New - Old)
1 2025-06-12 — 0.01% —

Full EPSS history (1 record total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-0913

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:H)
They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt.
Availability (A:N)
Service keeps running; no real outage angle.
 1.8 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-0913

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-0913

vendor priority summary link
alpine — CVE-2025-0913: 1 source package rows (go); 130 state rows across 2 repos (3.22-community, edge-community); fixed 2, open 128. https://security.alpinelinux.org/vuln/CVE-2025-0913
debian unimportant CVE-2025-0913 unimportant priority: Debian including 3 source packages (golang-1.15, golang-1.19, golang-1.24), 3 status rows across 3 suites (bookworm, bullseye, trixie): resolved 3. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-0913
suse medium CVE-2025-0913 severity moderate: SUSE including 115 source package names (1.23.10-2.7.6:go1.23-1.23.10-150000.1.34.1, 1.23.10-2.7.6:go1.23-doc-1.23.10-150000.1.34.1, …), 493 product×package rows across 34 product lines (Container bci/golang, Container suse/sl-micro/6.0/baremetal-os-container, … (34 product lines)): Fixed 386, Known Not Affected 107. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-0913/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-0913 medium priority: Ubuntu including 15 source packages (golang, golang-1.10, …), 108 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 57, ignored 30, needs-triage 21. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-0913

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-0913

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
golang go < 1.23.10 cpe:2.3:a:golang:go:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
golang go >= 1.24.0, < 1.24.4 cpe:2.3:a:golang:go:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-0913

cvelogic Threat Intelligence