Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

n8n Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources Vulnerability

Exploited · KEV 2026-03-11Metasploit moduleCVE-2025-68613CWE-913

Exploited since 2026-03-11. No WAF vendor names it yet. Our CRS test: partly blocked.

Edge rules
0/8
Our test
Partly blocked
CVSS
10.0
EPSS
99.0% Top 0.1%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-20: 0 posts2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts
Published
2025-12-19
n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system.… More

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2025-68613: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 3.1
Critical · 9.9 / 10

Exploitable over the network, with low privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability, and the impact can reach components beyond the vulnerable one.

Over the internetAny user loginNo user actionWorks reliablySpreads beyond the appFull compromise
How the score is built8 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
    Low
  • Privileges requiredThe attacker needs an ordinary user account.
    Low
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • ScopeThe attack can spread beyond the vulnerable component to other parts of the system.
    Changed
  • Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.
    High
  • Integrity impactAn attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.
    High
  • Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.
    High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationActive

Attackers are exploiting this in the wild.

AutomatableNo

At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.

Technical impactTotal

A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.

Public exploits

2 found
1 Metasploit0 Exploit-DB1 Scanner template0 GitHub PoCs

Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.

Timeline

  1. 2025-06-10
    Metasploit module published
    n8n Workflow Expression Remote Code Execution
  2. 2025-12-19
    CVE published
    CVE List
  3. 2026-03-11
    Added to CISA KEV
    Confirmed exploitation in the wild
  4. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked part of it
    paranoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
  5. 2026-11-02
    Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked part of it
    paranoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings

Social

2026-10-20: 0 posts2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts

No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each row gives the rule ID and its default action. The feed starts in January 2025, so older rules are missing.

AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each signature lists the CVEs it references, with its id and date. F5 does not state a default action; signatures enforce once staging ends in your policy.

AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.