Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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:XSummary
CVE-2025-25038 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Minidvblinux Minidvblinux. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 8% 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.
An OS command injection vulnerability exists in MiniDVBLinux version 5.4 and earlier. The system's web-based management interface fails to properly sanitize user-supplied input before passing it to operating system commands, as indicated by the associated CWE-78 classification. This flaw received a CVSS 4.0 score of 9.3.
A remote unauthenticated attacker can exploit the issue over the network to execute arbitrary commands as the root user, potentially compromising the entire device. Exploitation evidence was observed by the Shadowserver Foundation on 2024-04-10 UTC, and the EPSS score stands at 0.2921.
Public references including exploit-db, packetstormsecurity, and vulncheck entries document the command injection vector, while Fortiguard lists a corresponding IPS signature.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-18780
Vulnerability Data
An OS command injection vulnerability exists in MiniDVBLinux version 5.4 and earlier. The system’s web-based management interface fails to properly sanitize user-supplied input before passing it to operating system commands. A remote unauthenticated attacker can exploit this vulnerability to execute…
more
arbitrary commands as the root user, potentially compromising the entire device. Exploitation evidence was observed by the Shadowserver Foundation on 2024-04-10 UTC.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
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.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
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 and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.