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-2025-9812 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Tenda Ch22 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 48th 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.
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-2025-9812 is a buffer overflow vulnerability in Tenda CH22 firmware version 1.0.0.1, specifically affecting the formexeCommand function within the /goform/exeCommand file. The flaw is triggered by manipulating the cmdinput argument, leading to improper bounds checking and potential memory corruption. It is classified under CWE-119 and CWE-120, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
Remote attackers with low privileges, such as authenticated users, can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. Successful exploitation enables high-impact outcomes on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, including potential arbitrary code execution or system crashes via the buffer overflow.
Advisories and details are available from VulDB entries (https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.322139, https://vuldb.com/?id.322139, https://vuldb.com/?submit.641148) and the vendor site (https://www.tenda.com.cn/). A proof-of-concept exploit has been publicly disclosed on GitHub (https://github.com/csgii/cve/issues/1) and may be utilized by attackers.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-26390
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was determined in Tenda CH22 1.0.0.1. This vulnerability affects the function formexeCommand of the file /goform/exeCommand. Executing manipulation of the argument cmdinput can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been…
more
publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
- 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.