CVE-2025-46121
Ruckuswireless Ruckus Unleashed ≤ 200.15.6.212.14
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-46121 is a critical-severity Use of Externally-Controlled Format String (CWE-134) vulnerability in Ruckuswireless Ruckus Unleashed. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 33% 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-2025-46121 is a format-string vulnerability (CWE-134) in CommScope Ruckus Unleashed wireless controllers running versions prior to 200.15.6.212.14 and 200.17.7.0.139. The functions stamgr_cfg_adpt_addStaFavourite and stamgr_cfg_adpt_addStaIot pass an attacker-controlled client hostname directly to snprintf as the format argument, allowing format-specifier injection that can lead to arbitrary code execution on the controller.
A remote attacker can trigger the flaw by submitting a crafted request to the authenticated endpoint /admin/_conf.jsp. The same code path can also be reached without authentication or direct network access to the controller by spoofing the MAC address of a previously registered favourite station and supplying malicious format specifiers inside the DHCP hostname field, resulting in unauthenticated remote code execution with full system impact (CVSS 9.8).
The vendor has published security bulletin 330 and released fixed builds 200.15.6.212.14 and 200.17.7.0.139; administrators are advised to upgrade immediately and to restrict administrative access to the controller until patches are applied. The associated EPSS score remains low and flat at 0.0359 with no observed rise after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-22107
Vulnerability Data
An issue was discovered in CommScope Ruckus Unleashed prior to 200.15.6.212.14 and 200.17.7.0.139, where the functions `stamgr_cfg_adpt_addStaFavourite` and `stamgr_cfg_adpt_addStaIot` pass a client hostname directly to snprintf as the format string. A remote attacker can exploit this flaw either by sending…
more
a crafted request to the authenticated endpoint `/admin/_conf.jsp`, or without authentication and without direct network access to the controller by spoofing the MAC address of a favourite station and embedding malicious format specifiers in the DHCP hostname field, resulting in unauthenticated format-string processing and arbitrary code execution on the controller.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and static analysis can discover format-string vulnerabilities before deployment.
Input validation can reject or sanitize externally supplied format strings before they reach formatting functions.
Secure development standards and tools can mandate use of static format strings or safe formatting APIs.
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.
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 in development can detect format-string vulnerabilities before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and safe API usage that can prevent externally-controlled format strings.
Application security requirements can specify safe formatting functions and ban uncontrolled format strings.
Secure architecture principles discourage dangerous string-handling patterns that lead to format-string issues.
Secure coding standards directly forbid the use of untrusted format strings and prescribe safe alternatives.