CVE-2025-34033
RCE in 5Vtechnologies Blue Angel Software Suite
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/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-2025-34033 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in 5Vtechnologies Blue Angel Software Suite. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 11% 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 affects the Blue Angel Software Suite on embedded Linux devices. The flaw resides in the webctrl.cgi script, where the ping_addr parameter is passed to the system ping command without adequate sanitization, allowing shell metacharacters to alter command execution. The issue is tracked as CWE-78 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 7.7.
An authenticated attacker can exploit the vulnerability by sending a crafted GET request to /cgi-bin/webctrl.cgi?action=pingtest_update with shell metacharacters appended to ping_addr. Command output is reflected in the web interface, and default or backdoor credentials are sufficient to reach the endpoint. Successful exploitation grants arbitrary command execution with root privileges on the device.
Exploitation evidence was recorded by the Shadowserver Foundation on 2025-01-26 UTC. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at a peak of 0.0221 with no material increase after disclosure. Public references include an advisory from VulnCheck and Exploit-DB entries 46792 that document the injection vector.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-18969
Vulnerability Data
An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the Blue Angel Software Suite running on embedded Linux devices via the ping_addr parameter in the webctrl.cgi script. The application fails to properly sanitize input before passing it to the system-level ping command.…
more
An authenticated attacker can inject arbitrary commands by appending shell metacharacters to the ping_addr parameter in a crafted GET request to /cgi-bin/webctrl.cgi?action=pingtest_update. The command's output is reflected in the application's web interface, enabling attackers to view results directly. Default and backdoor credentials can be used to access the interface and exploit the issue. Successful exploitation results in arbitrary command execution as the root user. Exploitation evidence was observed by the Shadowserver Foundation on 2025-01-26 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.