CVE-2025-58464VulnerabilityPublished 7 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-58464: QNAP Systems QuMagie · CWE-23

Affects QNAP Systems QuMagieSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High : upgrade to 2.8.0 or 2.7.3 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.8High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.8.0, 2.7.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: High
Subsequent system integrity: High
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: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the Subsequent 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.
Subsequent 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 Subsequent System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Subsequent 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 7 Nov 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

Upgrade QNAP Systems QuMagie to 2.8.0 or 2.7.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
QNAP Systems Inc. QuMagie	Affected >=2.7.0 <2.8.0 <2.7.3	Fixed in 2.8.0 2.7.3

AI-suggested

1. Immediately upgrade all QuMagie installations to version 2.7.3 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. 2. Restrict network access to QuMagie management interfaces by implementing firewall rules or network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted internal networks only. 3. Employ VPN or secure tunnels for remote management access to reduce the attack surface. 4. Monitor network traffic and logs for unusual file access patterns or attempts to exploit path traversal, using IDS/IPS solutions tuned for directory traversal signatures. 5. Conduct regular audits of NAS device configurations and access controls to ensure adherence to security best practices. 6. Educate IT staff on the risks of path traversal vulnerabilities and the importance of timely patching. 7. If immediate patching is not feasible, consider disabling or limiting QuMagie features that process user-supplied file paths to reduce risk. 8. Maintain up-to-date backups of critical data to mitigate potential data loss or tampering resulting from exploitation.

Description

A relative path traversal vulnerability has been reported to affect QuMagie. If a remote attacker, they can then exploit the vulnerability to read the contents of unexpected files or system data. We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version: QuMagie 2.7.3 and later

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk of unauthorized data disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive corporate information, user data, or system credentials stored on QNAP NAS devices running vulnerable QuMagie versions. Such exposure could lead to further compromise, including lateral movement within networks or targeted attacks leveraging harvested data. Organizations relying on QNAP NAS for critical data storage or backup could face operational disruptions if attackers exploit this flaw to access or exfiltrate data. The lack of authentication and user interaction requirements means attackers can exploit the vulnerability remotely and stealthily, increasing the likelihood of successful attacks. This is particularly concerning for sectors with stringent data protection requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and government agencies within Europe. Additionally, the exposure of system files could reveal configuration details that facilitate subsequent attacks or persistence mechanisms. The absence of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the high severity score underscores the urgency for patching and network access controls.

CWE-23Relative Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that should be within a restricted directory, but it does not properly neutralize sequences such as ".." that can resolve to a location that is outside of that directory.
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.
Implementation · Input Validation
Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174).
Operation · Firewall
Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Relative Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

qnap.com/en/security-advisory/qsa-25-43 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 14 Nov 2025, 15:34 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-23

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats