CVE-2025-5442VulnerabilityPublished 2 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-5442: Linksys RE6500 · OS Command Injection

Affects Linksys RE6500Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · 13% EPSS · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 13.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 96% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to 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 2 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 2026-10-25.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Linksys RE6500	Affected =1.0.013.001 =1.0.04.001 =1.0.04.002 =1.1.05.003 =1.2.07.001	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately inventory their network infrastructure to identify the presence of affected Linksys extender models and firmware versions. Since no official patches are available, the primary mitigation is to isolate these devices from critical network segments and restrict management interface access to trusted administrative networks only. Implement network segmentation to limit the potential impact of a compromised device. Employ strict firewall rules to block unauthorized inbound traffic to the vulnerable endpoints, especially the /goform/RP_pingGatewayByBBS path. Monitor network traffic for unusual activity indicative of command injection attempts, such as unexpected system commands or abnormal outbound connections from extenders. Consider replacing vulnerable devices with models from vendors that provide timely security updates. Additionally, enable logging and alerting on network devices to detect exploitation attempts early. Educate IT staff on the risks of using consumer-grade devices in enterprise environments and enforce policies to avoid unsupported firmware versions. Finally, maintain up-to-date network device inventories and subscribe to vulnerability intelligence feeds to respond promptly to future disclosures.

Description

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Linksys RE6500, RE6250, RE6300, RE6350, RE7000 and RE9000 1.0.013.001/1.0.04.001/1.0.04.002/1.1.05.003/1.2.07.001. This issue affects the function RP_pingGatewayByBBS of the file /goform/RP_pingGatewayByBBS. The manipulation of the argument ip/nm/gw leads to os command injection. The attack may be initiated 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 and service providers relying on Linksys range extenders to enhance wireless coverage. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized command execution on network devices, resulting in potential network disruption, interception or manipulation of network traffic, and lateral movement within corporate networks. This could compromise sensitive data confidentiality and integrity, and degrade availability of network services. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that often deploy consumer-grade networking equipment like Linksys extenders without rigorous security controls are particularly vulnerable. Additionally, critical infrastructure sectors using these devices for network extension could face operational disruptions. The lack of vendor response and patches exacerbates the risk, as organizations must rely on alternative mitigations. Given the remote exploitability without user interaction, attackers can automate attacks at scale, increasing the threat landscape for European networks.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Jul 2025, 12:25 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats