Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹 Go
Not in CISA KEV

CVE-2025-59354 dragonfly

CVE-2025-59354 is a CWE-328 vulnerability in github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly. A fix is available for github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Dragonfly has weak integrity checks for downloaded files

Also known asGHSA-hx2h-vjw2-8r54GO-2025-3973
Published
Sep 17, 2025
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
2 pkgs
Patched
2 / 2
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 21, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
  • 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-2025-59354.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs6th percentile — riskier than 6% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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

2 pkgs affected
🐹github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly🐹d7y.io/dragonfly/v2

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Impact

The DragonFly2 uses a variety of hash functions, including the MD5 hash. This algorithm does not provide collision resistance; it is secure only against preimage attacks. While these security guarantees may be enough for the DragonFly2 system, it is not completely clear if there are any scenarios where lack of the collision resistance would compromise the system. There are no clear benefits to keeping the MD5 hash function in the system.

var pieceDigests []string
for i := int32(0); i < t.TotalPieces; i++ {
       pieceDigests = append(pieceDigests, t.Pieces[i].Md5)
}
digest := digest.SHA256FromStrings(pieceDigests...)
if digest != t.PieceMd5Sign {
       t.Errorf("invalid digest, desired: %s, actual: %s", t.PieceMd5Sign, digest)
       t.invalid.Store(true)
       return ErrInvalidDigest
}

Alice, a peer in the DragonFly2 system, creates two images: an innocent one, and one with malicious code. Both images consist of two pieces, and Alice generates the pieces so that their respective MD5 hashes collide (are the same). Therefore, the PieceMd5Sign metadata of both images are equal. Alice shares the innocent image with other peers, who attest to their validity (i.e., that it works as expected and is not malicious). Bob wants to download the image and requests it from the peer-to-peer network. After downloading the image, Bob checks its integrity with a SHA256 hash that is known to him. Alice, who is participating in the network, had already provided Bob the other image, the malicious one. Bob unintentionally uses the malicious image.

Patches

  • Dragonfy v2.1.0 and above.

Workarounds

There are no effective workarounds, beyond upgrading.

References

A third party security audit was performed by Trail of Bits, you can see the full report.

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please email us at [email protected].

Affected Packages

2 total 2 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/dragonflyoss/dragonflyall versions2.1.0go get github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly@v2.1.0
🐹God7y.io/dragonfly/v2all versions2.1.0go get d7y.io/dragonfly/v2@v2.1.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/dragonflyoss/dragonfly to 2.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2025-59354 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. 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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2025-59354 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2025-59354. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact The DragonFly2 uses a variety of hash functions, including the MD5 hash. This algorithm does not provide collision resistance; it is secure only against preimage attacks. While these security guarantees may be enough for the DragonFly2 system, it is not completely clear if there are any scenarios where lack of the collision resistance would compromise the system. There are no clear benefits to keeping the MD5 hash function in the system. ```golang var pieceDigests []string for i := int32(0); i < t.TotalPieces; i++ { pieceDigests = append(pieceDigests, t.Pieces[i].Md5) } dige
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2025-59354 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2025-59354 across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2025-59354: dragonfly | O3 Security