VulnerabilityPublished 13 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-9292: TP-Link Systems Omada Cloud Controller · Permissive Cross-domain Security Policy with Untrusted Domains

Affects TP-Link Systems Omada Cloud ControllerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.0 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

2.0Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: Present
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
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: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
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: 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: 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 13 Feb 2026
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
TP-Link Systems Inc.Omada Cloud Controller	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-9292 effectively, organizations should: 1) Verify that their Omada Cloud Controller instances are running the latest patched versions automatically deployed by TP-Link; 2) Conduct thorough security assessments to identify and remediate any existing client-side injection vulnerabilities (e.g., XSS) within the Omada Cloud Controller interface or integrated components, as these are prerequisites for exploitation; 3) Enforce strict access controls and limit authenticated user access to trusted personnel only, reducing the risk of insider threats or compromised credentials; 4) Implement Content Security Policy (CSP) headers and other browser security mechanisms to further restrict cross-origin interactions; 5) Monitor network management interfaces for unusual activity that could indicate attempts to exploit chained vulnerabilities; 6) Maintain regular software update policies and verify automatic patch deployments to ensure no instances remain vulnerable; 7) Educate administrators on the risks of cross-domain policies and the importance of secure coding practices in web interfaces. These steps go beyond generic patching by addressing the chained nature of the exploit and reinforcing defense-in-depth.

Description

A permissive web security configuration may allow cross-origin restrictions enforced by modern browsers to be bypassed under specific circumstances. Exploitation requires the presence of an existing client-side injection vulnerability and user access to the affected web interface. Successful exploitation could allow unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information. Fixed in updated Omada Cloud Controller service versions deployed automatically by TP‑Link. No user action is required.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-9292 is the potential unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information from the Omada Cloud Controller web interface. While the vulnerability itself does not allow direct remote exploitation or privilege escalation, it can be leveraged in combination with client-side injection vulnerabilities to bypass browser security policies. This could lead to leakage of configuration data, credentials, or other sensitive operational information managed by the Omada Cloud Controller. For organizations, this could compromise network management confidentiality and potentially aid attackers in further targeting network infrastructure. The impact is limited by the requirement for authenticated user access and the presence of another client-side injection vulnerability, reducing the likelihood of widespread exploitation. Nevertheless, in environments where Omada Cloud Controller is critical for network management, any data disclosure could have operational and security repercussions. Since TP-Link has automatically deployed patches, the window of exposure is expected to be short, but unpatched or offline instances remain at risk.

CWE-942Permissive Cross-domain Security Policy with Untrusted Domains (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessOWASP Top 10 A02:2025: Security Misconfiguration (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a web-client protection mechanism such as a Content Security Policy (CSP) or cross-domain policy file, but the policy includes untrusted domains with which the web client is allowed to communicate.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Attack Surface Reduction
Define a restrictive Content Security Policy or cross-domain policy file.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Attack Surface Reduction
Avoid using wildcards in the CSP / cross-domain policy file. Any domain matching the wildcard expression will be implicitly trusted, and can perform two-way interaction with the target server.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
For Flash, modify crossdomain.xml to use meta-policy options such as 'master-only' or 'none' to reduce the possibility of an attacker planting extraneous cross-domain policy files on a server.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V1.14.1 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Feb 2026, 08:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-942

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats