VulnerabilityPublished 7 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-43905: Dell PowerProtect Data Domain with Data Domain Operating System (DD OS) of Feature Release · Argument Injection

Affects Dell PowerProtect Data Domain with Data Domain Operating System (DD OS) of Feature ReleaseSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 7 Oct 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Dell PowerProtect Data Domain with Data Domain Operating System (DD OS) of Feature Release	Affected =7.7.1.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Dell’s official security advisories and apply patches or firmware updates promptly once released to address CVE-2025-43905.
Restrict remote network access to Dell PowerProtect Data Domain management interfaces using network segmentation, firewalls, and VPNs to limit exposure to trusted administrators only.
Implement strict access controls and multi-factor authentication for management accounts to reduce the risk of unauthorized access.
Regularly audit and monitor system logs for unusual command execution patterns or failed access attempts that could indicate exploitation attempts.
Employ network intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) tuned to detect anomalous command injection behaviors targeting backup systems.
Maintain up-to-date backups of configuration and system state to facilitate rapid recovery in case of service disruption.
Conduct security awareness training for administrators managing backup infrastructure to recognize and respond to potential attacks.
Evaluate and harden the overall backup environment by minimizing exposed services and disabling unnecessary features or protocols.

Description

Dell PowerProtect Data Domain with Data Domain Operating System (DD OS) of Feature Release versions 7.7.1.0 through 8.3.0.15, LTS2025 release version 8.3.1.0, LTS2024 release versions 7.13.1.0 through 7.13.1.30, LTS 2023 release versions 7.10.1.0 through 7.10.1.60, contain an Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') vulnerability. A low privileged attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Denial of service.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-43905 is the potential disruption of backup and data protection services provided by Dell PowerProtect Data Domain systems. Denial of service could interrupt backup operations, delay data recovery processes, and increase risk exposure in case of data loss or ransomware incidents. Organizations relying heavily on these systems for regulatory compliance, data retention, and disaster recovery may face operational and financial consequences. Critical sectors such as finance, healthcare, telecommunications, and government agencies could be particularly affected due to their dependence on continuous data protection and availability. Although the vulnerability does not expose sensitive data or allow unauthorized data modification, the loss of availability can degrade trust in backup infrastructure and complicate incident response efforts. The remote and low privilege nature of the exploit increases the attack surface, especially if management interfaces are exposed or insufficiently segmented within corporate networks.

CWE-88Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string.
Implementation · Parameterization
Where possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the command.
Architecture and Design · Input Validation
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your product: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, request headers as well as content, URL components, e-mail, files, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Flash Parameter Injection (opens in a new tab)
Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) (opens in a new tab)
OS Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Parameter Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000376224/dsa-2025-333-security-update-for-dell-powerprotect-data-domain-multiple-vulnerabilities (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Oct 2025, 01:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-88

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats