CVE-2025-2888 — tough
Fix: awslabs/tough@9b400e1CVE-2025-2888 is a CWE-1025 vulnerability in tough. A fix is available for tough — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Improper timestamp caching during snapshot rollback in tough
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2025-2888.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
Real-World Exposure
toughReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects crates.io packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
TUF repositories use the timestamp role to protect against rollback events by enabling an automated process to periodically sign the role's metadata. While tough will ensure that the version of snapshot metadata in new timestamp metadata files was always greater than or equal to the previously trusted version, it will only do so after persisting the timestamp metadata to its cache.
Impact
If the tough client successfully detects a rollback event in which timestamp metadata contains outdated snapshot metadata, the invalid timestamp metadata will still be persisted to cache as trusted. tough may then subsequently incorrectly identify valid timestamp metadata as being rolled back, preventing the client from consuming valid updates.
Impacted versions: < v0.20.0
Patches
A fix for this issue is available in tough version 0.20.0 and later. Customers are advised to upgrade to version 0.20.0 or later and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes.
Workarounds
There is no recommended work around. Customers are advised to upgrade to version 0.20.0 or the latest version.
References
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory we ask that you contact AWS/Amazon Security via our vulnerability reporting page [1] or directly via email to [email protected]. Please do not create a public GitHub issue.
[1] Vulnerability reporting page: https://aws.amazon.com/security/vulnerability-reporting
Acknowledgement
These issues were identified by the TUF-Conformance project. We would like to thank Google for collaborating on this issue through the coordinated vulnerability disclosure process.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦀crates.io | tough | all versions | 0.20.0cargo update -p tough --precise 0.20.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for tough, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update tough to 0.20.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2025-2888 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2025-2888 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2025-2888. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2025-2888 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2025-2888 across crates.io dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.