GHSA-27gv-mg7w-mm34 CVE-2025-7954
Shopware race condition bypasses voucher restrictions
High
Packagist
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.39%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 33.13% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-362 Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
- Fix
- None yet
- No fixed version published
Description
A race condition vulnerability has been identified in Shopware's voucher system of Shopware v6.6.10.4 that allows attackers to bypass intended voucher restrictions and exceed usage limitations.
Affected versions
Packagist
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| shopware/platform | <= 6.6.10.4 |
No fix yet |
How to fix
No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- None
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
CVSS 3.1 8.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Weakness
CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
- Architecture and Design: Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
- Architecture and Design: Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).
- Implementation: When using multithreading and operating on shared variables, only use thread-safe functions.
- Implementation: Use atomic operations on shared variables. Be wary of innocent-looking constructs such as "x++". This may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read, followed by a computation, followed by a write.
- Implementation: Use a mutex if available, but be sure to avoid related weaknesses such as CWE-412.
- Implementation: Avoid double-checked locking (CWE-609) and other implementation errors that arise when trying to avoid the overhead of synchronization.
- Implementation: Disable interrupts or signals over critical parts of the code, but also make sure that the code does not go into a large or infinite loop.
- Implementation: Use the volatile type modifier for critical variables to avoid unexpected compiler optimization or reordering. This does not necessarily solve the synchronization problem, but it can help.
- Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-gq96-5pfx-f4vc Shopware: SSRF in Media External-Link Endpoint Bypasses IP Validation | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-xvhc-gm7j-mhmc Shopware: Stored XSS via SVG file upload — no SVG sanitization | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-9v5m-39wh-5chq Shopware: Unauthorized Payment Trigger for Foreign Orders via /store-api/handle-payment | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-f8q6-3g5w-jjr6 Shopware: Admin API ACL Bypass in Order State Transition Endpoints | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-4x3x-869w-xx3m Shopware SSO referer trust leading to an arbitrary redirect target | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-7w52-7jvm-m9vw Shopware: Timing-attack on admin panel allowing enumeration of administrator usernames | Low | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-v39m-97p8-gqg7 Shopware: Privilege escalation: non-admin user with user:create ACL can create admin accounts | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
| GHSA-8v9p-g828-v98f Shopware: Admin Account Takeover via User Recovery Hash Exposure | Medium | Also affects shopware/platform |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor