CVE-2025-15132
Command Injection in Zspace Z4Pro\+ Firmware ≤ 1.0.0440024
Raw vector
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/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-2025-15132 is a low-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Zspace Z4Pro\+ Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
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.
CVE-2025-15132 is a command injection vulnerability affecting ZSPACE Z4Pro+ version 1.0.0440024. The flaw resides in the zfilev2_api_open function within the /v2/file/safe/open endpoint of the HTTP POST Request Handler component. It is associated with CWEs-74 and CWE-77 and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L).
An attacker can exploit this vulnerability remotely by manipulating HTTP POST requests to the affected endpoint, provided they possess low privileges. Exploitation requires low complexity and no user interaction, enabling limited impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. A proof-of-concept exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
Advisories provide further details via references such as https://github.com/LX-66-LX/cve/issues/2, https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.338510, https://vuldb.com/?id.338510, and https://vuldb.com/?submit.713885. The vendor was contacted early about the disclosure, published on 2025-12-28.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-205504
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was determined in ZSPACE Z4Pro+ 1.0.0440024. The affected element is the function zfilev2_api_open of the file /v2/file/safe/open of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. This manipulation causes command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The…
more
exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure.
- 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.