VulnerabilityPublished 6 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-22490: QNAP Systems File Station 5 · NULL Pointer Dereference

Affects QNAP Systems File Station 5Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 5.6.0 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.6.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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

Upgrade QNAP Systems File Station 5 to 5.6.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
QNAP Systems Inc. File Station 5	Affected >=5.5.0 <5.6.0	Fixed in 5.6.0

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should prioritize upgrading QNAP File Station 5 to version 5.5.6.4847 or later, where the issue has been fixed. Beyond patching, organizations should implement strict user account management policies, including enforcing strong, unique passwords and enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA) where supported to reduce the risk of account compromise. Network segmentation should be employed to limit access to NAS devices only to trusted internal networks or VPN users. Monitoring and logging of user activities on File Station can help detect suspicious behavior indicative of credential misuse. Additionally, organizations should conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focused on NAS devices to identify and remediate potential weaknesses proactively. Disabling or restricting remote access to File Station where not necessary can further reduce exposure. Finally, educating users about phishing and credential security will help prevent the initial compromise required to exploit this vulnerability.

Description

A NULL pointer dereference vulnerability has been reported to affect File Station 5. If a remote attacker gains a user account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to launch a denial-of-service (DoS) attack. We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version: File Station 5 5.5.6.4847 and later

Impact

For European organizations using QNAP File Station 5, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to service availability. File Station is commonly used for file management and sharing in network-attached storage (NAS) devices, which are critical for data accessibility and business continuity. A successful DoS attack could disrupt operations, delay access to important files, and potentially impact productivity. While the vulnerability does not directly expose sensitive data or allow unauthorized data modification, the denial of service could be leveraged as part of a broader attack strategy, especially if attackers have already compromised user credentials. Organizations with weak user account management or insufficient network segmentation may be more vulnerable. The impact is more pronounced in sectors relying heavily on NAS devices for daily operations, such as small and medium enterprises, educational institutions, and public sector organizations. Given the medium severity and the requirement for prior user account access, the threat is moderate but should not be underestimated, especially in environments where credential compromise is a known risk.

CWE-476NULL Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #13OWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.
Implementation
For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished.
Requirements
Select a programming language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is non-null before acting upon it.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

qnap.com/en/security-advisory/qsa-25-16 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 04:26 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-476

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats