CVE-2025-3499 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-3499
Vulnerability Scoring

10.0
/10
Critical Risk

As a catastrophic security flaw, CVE-2025-3499 has severe implications, demanding immediate intervention.

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity: Low
    Exploits can be performed without significant complexity or special conditions.
  • Attack Vector: Network
    Vulnerability is exploitable over a network without physical access.
  • Privileges Required: None
    No privileges are required for exploitation.
  • Scope: Changed
    Successful exploitation can impact components beyond the vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2025-3499 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕐 10 Jul 2025, 13:17 UTC
Originally published on: 🕘 09 Jul 2025, 09:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 1 days

CVSS Release: version 3

CVSS3 Source

a6d3dc9e-0591-4a13-bce7-0f5b31ff6158

CVSS3 Type

Secondary

CVSS3 Vector

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

CVE-2025-3499 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-3499: The device has two web servers that expose unauthenticated REST APIs on the management network (TCP ports 8084 and 8086). Exploiting OS command injection through these APIs, an attacker can send arbitrary commands that are executed with administrative permissions by the underlying operating system.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-3499

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-3499 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2025-3499

With low attack complexity and no required privileges, CVE-2025-3499 is an easy target for cybercriminals. Organizations should prioritize immediate mitigation measures to prevent unauthorized access and data breaches.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-3499, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-3499, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: High
    Exploiting CVE-2025-3499 can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, severely compromising data privacy.
  • Integrity: High
    CVE-2025-3499 could allow unauthorized modifications to data, potentially affecting system reliability and trust.
  • Availability: High
    CVE-2025-3499 can disrupt system operations, potentially causing complete denial of service (DoS).

CVE-2025-3499 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-78

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

  • Command Line Execution through SQL Injection CAPEC-108 An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
  • Command Delimiters CAPEC-15 An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or denylist input validation, as opposed to allowlist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or denylist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
  • Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers CAPEC-43 An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: <parser1> --> <input validator> --> <parser2>. In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
  • Argument Injection CAPEC-6 An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
  • OS Command Injection CAPEC-88 In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-3499: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-7697 – The Integration for Google Sheets and Contact Form 7, WPForms, Elementor, Ninja Forms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to PHP Object Injection in...
  • CVE-2025-7696 – The Integration for Pipedrive and Contact Form 7, WPForms, Elementor, Ninja Forms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to PHP Object Injection in all...
  • CVE-2025-7669 – The Avishi WP PayPal Payment Button plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0. Thi...
  • CVE-2025-7661 – The Partnerský systém Martinus plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the plugin's 'martinus' shortcode in all versi...
  • CVE-2025-7658 – The Temporarily Hidden Content plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the plugin's 'temphc-start' shortcode in all v...