VulnerabilityPublished 31 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-51385: Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.5 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.5Low

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 35% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
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: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
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 31 Jul 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 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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate network segmentation: Isolate affected D-LINK DI-8200 devices from untrusted networks and restrict management access to trusted internal networks only. 2. Disable remote management interfaces if not strictly necessary, or restrict access via IP whitelisting and VPNs. 3. Monitor network traffic for anomalous requests targeting the 'id' parameter or unusual activity on the router's management interface. 4. Implement strict input validation and filtering at network perimeter devices to block malformed requests targeting known vulnerable parameters. 5. Engage with D-LINK support or vendor channels to obtain patches or firmware updates as soon as they become available. 6. If patching is not immediately possible, consider replacing affected devices with alternative hardware not impacted by this vulnerability. 7. Conduct regular vulnerability scanning and penetration testing focused on network infrastructure to detect exploitation attempts. 8. Maintain up-to-date asset inventories to identify all affected devices promptly. 9. Educate network administrators on the risks and signs of exploitation related to this vulnerability.

Description

D-LINK DI-8200 16.07.26A1 is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow in the yyxz_dlink_asp function via the id parameter.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses significant risks. Compromise of routers can lead to interception, modification, or disruption of network traffic, undermining confidentiality, integrity, and availability of communications. Attackers could leverage this vulnerability to gain persistent footholds within corporate networks, bypass perimeter defenses, or launch further attacks such as lateral movement or data exfiltration. Given the critical role of routers in network infrastructure, exploitation could result in widespread network outages or interception of sensitive data. Additionally, organizations in sectors with strict data protection regulations (e.g., GDPR) could face compliance violations and reputational damage if such a breach occurs. The absence of known exploits currently may provide a window for proactive mitigation, but the potential for rapid weaponization exists given the straightforward nature of buffer overflow attacks. The impact is heightened for organizations relying on the affected D-LINK DI-8200 devices, especially those with remote management enabled or exposed to the internet.

CWE-121Stack-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #14
A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Implementation
Implement and perform bounds checking on input.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Jul 2025, 18:03 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-121

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats