Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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-2025-8170 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Totolink T6 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 39% 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.
A critical buffer overflow vulnerability tracked as CVE-2025-8170 affects the TOTOLINK T6 router running firmware 4.1.5cu.748_B20211015. It resides in the tcpcheck_net function of the /router/meshSlaveDlfw file inside the MQTT Packet Handler component, where unsanitized input to the serverIp argument can overflow a buffer. The issue is assigned CWE-119 and CWE-120 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 7.4.
An authenticated attacker can trigger the flaw remotely by sending a crafted MQTT packet, resulting in high impact to confidentiality, integrity, and availability on the device. Public proof-of-concept code demonstrating the exploit has been released on GitHub.
The associated EPSS score remains flat at 0.0135 with no material increase since disclosure, indicating limited observed exploitation interest to date. Details and the PoC are documented in VulDB entries and the linked GitHub repository.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-22753
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability classified as critical was found in TOTOLINK T6 4.1.5cu.748_B20211015. This vulnerability affects the function tcpcheck_net of the file /router/meshSlaveDlfw of the component MQTT Packet Handler. The manipulation of the argument serverIp leads to buffer overflow. The attack can…
more
be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2V5.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.
Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.