VulnerabilityPublished 1 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-5408: WAVLINK QUANTUM D2G · Buffer Overflow

Affects WAVLINK QUANTUM D2GSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

9.3Critical

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

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 57% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: High
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system 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 vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; 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 Vulnerable System (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).
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 1 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

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately audit their network environments to identify the presence of affected WAVLINK devices running vulnerable firmware versions. Since no official patches are available, practical mitigations include: 1) Restricting access to the router's web management interface by implementing network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access only to trusted administrative hosts. 2) Disabling remote management features on these devices if not strictly necessary. 3) Employing intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) with signatures or heuristics capable of detecting anomalous HTTP POST requests targeting the login.cgi endpoint with suspicious 'login_page' parameters. 4) Monitoring network traffic for unusual patterns or signs of exploitation attempts. 5) Planning for device replacement or firmware upgrade once a patch is released. 6) Applying compensating controls such as VPN-only access to management interfaces and enforcing strong authentication where possible. 7) Educating IT staff about the vulnerability and signs of compromise. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on access control, monitoring, and compensating controls tailored to the specific vulnerability vector.

Description

A vulnerability was found in WAVLINK QUANTUM D2G, QUANTUM D3G, WL-WN530G3A, WL-WN530HG3, WL-WN532A3 and WL-WN576K1 up to V1410_240222 and classified as critical. Affected by this issue is the function sys_login of the file /cgi-bin/login.cgi of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. The manipulation of the argument login_page leads to buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk, especially for enterprises, ISPs, and small-to-medium businesses relying on WAVLINK routers for network connectivity. Successful exploitation can lead to full compromise of the affected device, enabling attackers to execute arbitrary code, disrupt network availability, intercept or manipulate traffic, and potentially pivot to internal networks. Given the critical nature and ease of exploitation, attackers could deploy malware, establish persistent backdoors, or launch further attacks against corporate infrastructure. The lack of vendor response and patches exacerbates the risk, as organizations may be forced to rely on mitigations or device replacement. Additionally, sectors with high regulatory requirements for data protection (e.g., finance, healthcare) could face compliance violations if breaches occur due to this vulnerability. The exposure of management interfaces to the internet in many European networks increases the likelihood of exploitation attempts.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…