CVE-2025-10323
Command Injection in Wavlink Wl-Wn578W2 Firmware m78w2_v221110
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2025-10323 is a medium-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Wavlink Wl-Wn578W2 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 6% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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.
A command injection vulnerability exists in the Wavlink WL-WN578W2 device running firmware 221110. The flaw resides in the function sub_409184 within the file /wizard_rep.shtml, where unsanitized input to the sel_EncrypTyp argument is passed to a system command. The issue is tracked as CWE-74 and CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 5.5.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted sel_EncrypTyp value to the affected endpoint and execute arbitrary commands on the device. Successful exploitation yields limited read, write, and resource-control capabilities on the target without requiring user interaction or credentials. A working proof-of-concept has been published.
The vendor was notified prior to disclosure but did not respond or issue a patch. The current and peak EPSS scores remain at 0.0103, indicating no material increase in observed exploitation activity since publication.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-29073
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was found in Wavlink WL-WN578W2 221110. The impacted element is the function sub_409184 of the file /wizard_rep.shtml. The manipulation of the argument sel_EncrypTyp results in command injection. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been…
more
made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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 coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.