CVE-2025-12295
Dlink Dap-2695 Firmware 2.00
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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:XSummary
CVE-2025-12295 is a medium-severity Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity (CWE-345) vulnerability in Dlink Dap-2695 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.6 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Supply Chain Compromise (T1195); ranked at the 34th 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 SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) and SC-23 (Session Authenticity) — 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-2025-12295 is a vulnerability involving improper verification of cryptographic signatures in the Firmware Update Handler component of D-Link DAP-2695 firmware version 2.00RC13. The issue resides in the function sub_40C6B8, classified under CWE-345 (Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity) and CWE-347 (Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature). It carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.6 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating medium severity with network accessibility but high attack complexity and required high privileges.
The vulnerability enables remote exploitation where an attacker with high privileges can manipulate firmware updates to bypass signature checks, potentially leading to high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts. Attacks are described as highly complex with difficult exploitability, though a public exploit is available and could be used against affected devices.
References, including analyses on GitHub and VULDB, detail the flaw but note that it only impacts products no longer supported by D-Link, implying no official patches or mitigations are available. The D-Link website provides general product information but no specific advisory for this CVE. Security practitioners should isolate or decommission affected DAP-2695 devices.
Notable context includes the public availability of the exploit and its restriction to end-of-support hardware, increasing risks in legacy network environments without vendor maintenance.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-36210
Vulnerability Data
A weakness has been identified in D-Link DAP-2695 2.00RC13. The affected element is the function sub_40C6B8 of the component Firmware Update Handler. Executing manipulation can lead to improper verification of cryptographic signature. The attack can be launched remotely. Attacks of…
more
this nature are highly complex. The exploitability is described as difficult. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 22 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V3.5.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Explicit requirement to protect session authenticity structurally prevents the weakness for communications.
Requiring cryptographic protection mechanisms forces correct signature verification to be implemented for data protection.
Integrity verification tools detect (but do not stop) the acceptance of data lacking authenticity.
Associating security attributes with exchanged information supports verification of authenticity.
Integrity protection on transmitted data directly stops acceptance of unauthenticated or altered data.
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.
Digital signatures are explicitly cited to protect integrity of data-at-rest, so proper verification directly mitigates the weakness.
Digital signatures are explicitly cited to protect integrity of data-in-transit, so proper verification directly mitigates the weakness.
CWE-345 directly impairs RC.RP-05's verification of restored-asset integrity/authenticity, largely defeating the outcome while still leaving other restoration-confirmation steps partially viable.
Requires assessing authenticity and integrity of acquired assets, which commonly relies on signature verification but is limited to pre-acquisition.
Secure SDLC practices include code signing and signature verification requirements, addressing the weakness during development.
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.
Security testing can detect missing or weak data authenticity verification.
Network controls can enforce authenticated channels, reducing risk of accepting unauthentic data.
Secure network services often include authenticity checks for data exchanged over those services.
Cryptographic mechanisms directly verify data origin and integrity, preventing acceptance of unauthentic data.
Secure SDLC incorporates authenticity verification requirements throughout development.
Application security requirements can mandate data authenticity verification mechanisms.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248574 YUM must be configured to prevent the installation of patches, service packs, device drivers, or OL 8 system components that have not been digitally signed using a certificate that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
- V-248575 OL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
Oracle Linux 9 (2 rules)
- V-271525 OL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
- V-271523 OL 9 must check the GPG signature of locally installed software packages before installation. prevents CWE-347
RHEL 7 (2 rules)
- V-204447 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
- V-204448 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
RHEL 8 (2 rules)
- V-230264 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-257822 RHEL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. prevents CWE-345, CWE-347