VulnerabilityPublished 28 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-9575: Linksys RE6250 · OS Command Injection

Affects Linksys RE6250Source CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 6.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 94% 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/E:P

Base metrics

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

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 28 Aug 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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
Linksys RE6250	Affected 1.0.04.001 – 1.2.07.001 5 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Given the absence of official patches, European organizations should implement immediate compensating controls. First, restrict remote access to the management interfaces of affected Linksys devices by limiting access to trusted IP ranges or disabling remote management entirely if not required. Network segmentation should isolate these extenders from sensitive internal networks to contain potential compromise. Monitoring network traffic for unusual patterns or command injection attempts targeting /cgi-bin/upload.cgi can aid early detection. Organizations should consider replacing vulnerable devices with updated models or alternative vendors that provide timely security updates. If firmware updates become available, prioritize their deployment. Additionally, enforce strong administrative credentials and regularly audit device configurations. Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) with signatures for command injection attempts targeting Linksys devices. Finally, maintain an inventory of all affected devices to ensure comprehensive coverage of mitigation efforts.

Description

A vulnerability was determined in Linksys RE6250, RE6300, RE6350, RE6500, 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 cgiMain of the file /cgi-bin/upload.cgi. Executing manipulation of the argument filename can lead to os command injection. The attack may be performed from a remote location. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a tangible risk to network infrastructure security. Linksys range extenders are commonly used in small to medium enterprises and home office environments to extend Wi-Fi coverage. Exploitation could allow attackers to gain control over these devices, enabling interception or manipulation of network traffic, launching further attacks within the internal network, or causing denial of service by disrupting network connectivity. This is particularly concerning for organizations relying on these devices for critical connectivity or those with less mature network segmentation. The lack of vendor response and patches increases the window of exposure. Additionally, compromised devices could be used as footholds for lateral movement or as part of botnets, amplifying the threat landscape. The medium CVSS score reflects that while the attack requires some privileges (PR:L), it does not require user interaction or complex conditions, making it a realistic threat if attackers gain limited access or exploit other vulnerabilities to escalate privileges.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Sep 2025, 18:41 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats