Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2018-25301 is a high-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Tomsguide (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 8.6 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 5th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2018-25301 is a structured exception handling (SEH) local buffer overflow vulnerability in Easy MPEG to DVD Burner version 1.7.11. The flaw occurs when the application processes a malicious username string, leading to overflow of the SEH chain and enabling arbitrary code execution. It is classified under CWE-120 (Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input) with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.4 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability from a local attack vector with low complexity and no privileges required.
Local attackers can exploit this vulnerability by supplying a crafted payload as the username, consisting of junk data to fill the buffer, followed by SEH chain pointers and shellcode. This overwrites the SEH handler, redirecting execution flow to the attacker's shellcode, which can run arbitrary commands such as launching calc.exe. The attack requires local access to the system running the vulnerable software but no user interaction beyond providing the malicious input.
Advisories and exploit details are available in referenced sources, including an Exploit-DB entry (https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/44565) demonstrating a proof-of-concept payload, a VulnCheck advisory (https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/easy-mpeg-to-dvd-burner-seh-local-buffer-overflow), and the software download page (https://downloads.tomsguide.com/MPEG-Easy-Burner,0301-10418.html). No patches or specific mitigations are detailed in the provided information.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2018-21822
Vulnerability Data
Easy MPEG to DVD Burner 1.7.11 contains a structured exception handling (SEH) local buffer overflow vulnerability that allows local attackers to execute arbitrary code by supplying a malicious username string. Attackers can craft a payload containing junk data, SEH chain…
more
pointers, and shellcode that overwrites the SEH handler to redirect execution and run arbitrary commands like opening calc.exe.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.
Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.
Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.
Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.
Secure development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.