# Question about recent cve's **URL:** \ **Category:** Security\ **Created:** [1 October 2025 16:26 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135 "2025-10-01T16:26:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![dan786](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/dan786/32/13325_2.png) [@dan786](https://community.ipfire.org/u/dan786)\ **Post date:** [1 October 2025 16:26 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/1 "2025-10-01T16:26:46Z")
what is the likely hood about theses happening? 2025-50976, 2025-50975 , 2025-50974 Are they going be addressed? [https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-50976](https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-50976) [https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-50975](https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-50975) ---
**Author:** ![bonnietwin](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/bonnietwin/32/12350_2.png) [@bonnietwin](https://community.ipfire.org/u/bonnietwin)\ **Post date:** [1 October 2025 16:31 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/2 "2025-10-01T16:31:40Z")
Fixes are already in our next repo. Of course to execute the vulnerabilities your attacker has to have authenticated local access to the system. The risk is that some other unknown vulnerability gives an attacker an entry to a system and then it is good to not have any of the known vulnerabilities available for them to leverage. ---
**Author:** ![bonnietwin](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/bonnietwin/32/12350_2.png) [@bonnietwin](https://community.ipfire.org/u/bonnietwin)\ **Post date:** [1 October 2025 17:06 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/3 "2025-10-01T17:06:28Z")
Looking at these closer, these CVE’s have been raised by someone who has not communicated with IPFire at all and just published the CVE’s. We have created fixes because another researcher communicated to us and provided a report with details of the vulnerabilities found and more technical details. Based on this we created the fixes. This researcher has reserved CVE numbers earlier than the ones you have highlighted. So the person related to your CVE’s, has found some vulnerabilities and made no attempt to report them, either by email to the [security@ipfire.org](mailto:security@ipfire.org) address or in the IPFire bugzilla as security bugs. I find this type of approach really very unsocial. Luckily this other researcher did take the time to report the vulnerabilities to us and we have already worked on them and the fixes merged on 25th September, two days after we were informed about them. ---
**Author:** ![bobbytables](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/bobbytables/32/15402_2.png) [@bobbytables](https://community.ipfire.org/u/bobbytables)\ **Post date:** [1 October 2025 18:29 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/4 "2025-10-01T18:29:10Z")
Thanks to the maintainers! ---
**Author:** ![ms](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/ms/32/9344_2.png) [@ms](https://community.ipfire.org/u/ms)\ **Post date:** [3 October 2025 09:25 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/5 "2025-10-03T09:25:19Z")
Hello, @dan786 thank you for letting us know. > [@bonnietwin](#): > > Looking at these closer, these CVE’s have been raised by someone who has not communicated with IPFire at all and just published the CVE’s. I didn’t know this needed saying, but of course we strongly encourage everyone to report and kind of bug - whether it is security critical or not - to us. Over the past years we had so many contribute to IPFire and IPFire wouldn’t be what it is today without the help of each of these individuals. Filing for a CVE (which is something that I would consider is a first step on the route to responsible disclosure) and then not report it to the actual project is indeed not a very good thing to do. The next step would have been to consult our security policy and simply send us an email: > **[IPFire Security Policy](https://www.ipfire.org/docs/devel/security-policy)** I believe that this individual has used some AI to find “security issues” and keeps publishing them as their own. Some other maintainers have complained about a huge amount of AI-generated reports which basically lead to nowhere. Daniel Stenberg calls it “AI slop”: > **[The I in LLM stands for intelligence](https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/01/02/the-i-in-llm-stands-for-intelligence/)** > > I have held back on writing anything about AI or how we (not) use AI for development in the curl factory. Now I can't hold back anymore. Let me show you the most significant effect of AI on curl as of today - with examples. Bug Bounty Having a bug... > **[Death by a thousand slops](https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2025/07/14/death-by-a-thousand-slops/)** > > I have previously blogged about the relatively new trend of AI slop in vulnerability reports submitted to curl and how it hurts and exhausts us. This trend does not seem to slow down. On the contrary, it seems that we have recently not only received... When in the past having a CVE filed against something, it used to be a big deal. These days, it could mean nothing. The reports here don’t seem to have a very high severity for us, but we have already developed fixes which will be released with the next update. ---
**Author:** ![dan786](https://community.ipfire.org/user_avatar/community.ipfire.org/dan786/32/13325_2.png) [@dan786](https://community.ipfire.org/u/dan786)\ **Post date:** [4 October 2025 21:34 UTC](https://community.ipfire.org/t/question-about-recent-cves/15135/6 "2025-10-04T21:34:43Z")
This is why i asked a question regarding these things since i wanted know your pov regarding them . i agree with with you on ai. I notice spike in look like scanners possibly ai or bot some sort