VulnerabilityPublished 24 Feb 2026Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-13942: Zyxel EX3510-B0 firmware · OS Command Injection

Affects Zyxel EX3510-B0 firmwareSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.8 Critical.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.8Critical

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 67% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 29 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
ZyxelEX3510-B0 firmware	Affected =<= 5.17(ABUP.15.1)C0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Immediately restrict UPnP access on Zyxel EX3510-B0 devices by disabling UPnP if not required or limiting it to trusted internal networks only.
Implement network segmentation to isolate vulnerable devices from critical assets and the internet, reducing exposure to remote attackers.
Monitor network traffic for unusual or malformed UPnP SOAP requests indicative of exploitation attempts using IDS/IPS solutions with updated signatures.
Apply strict firewall rules to block unsolicited inbound UPnP traffic from untrusted sources.
Regularly audit and inventory Zyxel devices to identify affected firmware versions and prioritize remediation.
Engage with Zyxel support for firmware updates or patches as they become available and plan for timely deployment.
Employ endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools on connected systems to detect lateral movement originating from compromised devices.
Educate network administrators on the risks of UPnP exposure and enforce secure configuration baselines. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling UPnP exposure, network architecture adjustments, and active monitoring tailored to this specific vulnerability.

Description

A command injection vulnerability in the UPnP function of the Zyxel EX3510-B0 firmware versions through 5.17(ABUP.15.1)C0 could allow a remote attacker to execute operating system (OS) commands on an affected device by sending specially crafted UPnP SOAP requests.

Impact

The potential impact of CVE-2025-13942 is severe for organizations worldwide using Zyxel EX3510-B0 devices. Successful exploitation grants attackers full control over the affected device, compromising confidentiality by allowing data interception or exfiltration, integrity by enabling unauthorized configuration changes, and availability by potentially disrupting device operations or causing denial of service. Given that these devices often serve as network gateways or critical infrastructure components, attackers could pivot into internal networks, escalate privileges, and conduct broader attacks such as ransomware deployment or espionage. The lack of authentication and user interaction requirements significantly lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing the risk of widespread attacks. Organizations in sectors like telecommunications, government, finance, and critical infrastructure that rely on Zyxel networking equipment are particularly vulnerable. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive defense, but the critical severity demands urgent attention to prevent future compromise.

CWE-78Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command (OS Command Injection) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #9OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command before it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Sandbox or Jail
Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
For any data that will be used to generate a command to be executed, keep as much of that data out of external control as possible. For example, in web applications, this may require storing the data locally in the session's state instead of sending it out to the client in a hidden form field.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection Defense (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
Argument Injection (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

zyxel.com/global/en/support/security-advisories/zyxel-security-advisory-for-null-pointer-dereference-and-command-injection-vulnerabilities-in-certain-4g-lte-5g-nr-cpe-dsl-ethernet-cpe-fiber-onts-security-routers-and-wireless-extenders-02-24-2026 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Mar 2026, 20:27 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-78

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats