Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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-2025-9189 is a high-severity Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input (CWE-1285) vulnerability in Ni Dasylab. Its CVSS base score is 8.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 19th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-26447
Vulnerability Data
There is an out of bounds write vulnerability due to improper bounds checking resulting in a large destination address when parsing a DSB file with Digilent DASYLab. This vulnerability may result in arbitrary code execution. Successful exploitation requires an attacker…
more
to get a user to open a specially crafted DSB file. The vulnerability affects all versions of DASYLab.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.2V2.1.1V2.2.1V2.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requires explicit validation of supplied indices/offsets/positions before they are used to access buffers or other indexable resources.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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, preventing this class of flaw at development time.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover missing index validation via scanning or reviews.
Patching and replacement can remediate instances of the weakness after discovery.
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 can detect missing or incorrect index validation during development and acceptance.
Secure development lifecycle includes input validation requirements that can prevent improper index handling.
Application security requirements typically mandate bounds checking and validation of offsets/indices.
Secure architecture principles include defensive input validation and bounds checking for indexable resources.
Secure coding standards directly require validation of indices, positions, and offsets before use.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.