VulnerabilityPublished 13 Nov 2025Updated 14 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-60701: Command Injection

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:55 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 3.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 87% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: 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 impacted component.
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 on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 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 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

Monitor D-Link’s official channels for firmware updates addressing this vulnerability and apply patches promptly once available.
Until patches are released, restrict access to the router’s web management interface by limiting it to trusted internal networks or via VPNs.
Disable remote management features on the router if not strictly necessary to reduce exposure.
Implement network segmentation to isolate routers from critical systems and sensitive data environments.
Employ intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to monitor for unusual HTTP requests targeting the router’s web interface, focusing on patterns indicative of command injection attempts.
Regularly audit router configurations and logs for signs of unauthorized changes or suspicious activity.
Educate network administrators about the risks of unauthenticated remote access vulnerabilities and encourage adherence to the principle of least privilege.
Consider deploying network-level firewall rules to block unsolicited inbound traffic to router management ports from untrusted sources.
If feasible, replace affected hardware with models that have no known vulnerabilities or have received timely security updates.

Description

A command injection vulnerability exists in the D-Link DIR-882 Router firmware DIR882A1_FW102B02 within the `prog.cgi` and `rc` binaries. The `sub_433188` function in `prog.cgi` stores user-supplied email configuration parameters (`EmailFrom`, `EmailTo`, `SMTPServerAddress`, `SMTPServerPort`, `AccountName`) in NVRAM via `nvram_safe_set`. These values are later retrieved in the `sub_448FDC` function of `rc` using `nvram_safe_get` and concatenated into shell commands executed via `twsystem()` without sanitization. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary commands on the device through specially crafted HTTP requests to the router's web interface.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-60701 on European organizations lies in the potential for unauthorized command execution on affected D-Link DIR-882 routers. This can lead to confidentiality breaches, such as interception or manipulation of network traffic, and integrity compromises, including unauthorized configuration changes or deployment of malicious payloads within the network. Although availability is not directly impacted, the attacker could leverage the router as a foothold for lateral movement or persistent access, increasing overall risk. European enterprises and service providers relying on these routers for network connectivity, especially in small to medium-sized businesses or branch offices, may face increased exposure. The unauthenticated nature of the exploit means attackers do not need credentials, heightening the threat level. Additionally, compromised routers could be used in botnets or as pivot points for further attacks against critical infrastructure or sensitive data. The medium CVSS score reflects these risks but also indicates that exploitation requires specific crafted requests and knowledge of the router’s interface.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
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
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (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 20 Nov 2025, 19:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats