CVE-2025-9582
Command Injection in Comfast Cf-N1 Firmware 2.6.0
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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-2025-9582 is a low-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Comfast Cf-N1 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
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.
CVE-2025-9582 is a command injection vulnerability in the Comfast CF-N1 firmware version 2.6.0. The flaw resides in the ntp_timezone function within the /usr/bin/webmgnt file, where manipulation of the timestr argument enables arbitrary command execution. It is associated with CWE-74 (Improper Neutralization of Special Elements) and CWE-77 (Command Injection), carrying a CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L).
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely by attackers with low privileges, such as authenticated users, requiring low complexity and no user interaction. Successful exploitation allows limited impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability through injected commands, potentially enabling further compromise depending on the attacker's access level.
References include proof-of-concept exploits published on GitHub at paths like /ZZ2266/.github.io/tree/main/COMFAST/N1V2/ntp_timezone, along with entries on VulDB (ctiid.321695, id.321695, submit.636128). No vendor patches or specific mitigation guidance are detailed in the available sources.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-26144
Vulnerability Data
A flaw has been found in Comfast CF-N1 2.6.0. Affected is the function ntp_timezone of the file /usr/bin/webmgnt. Executing manipulation of the argument timestr can lead to command injection. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been published…
more
and may be used.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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 standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.