Improper Certificate ValidationWeakness · CWE-295

CVE-2025-1001

MEDIUM · 5.7 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-02-21
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
60/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Medixant RadiAnt DICOM Viewer is vulnerable due to failure of the update mechanism to verify the update server's certificate which could allow an attacker to alter network traffic and carry out a machine-in-the-middle attack (MITM). An attacker could modify the server's response and deliver a malicious update to the user.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

Medixant RadiAnt DICOM Viewer's update mechanism fails to verify the update server's SSL/TLS certificate, allowing an attacker on the same network to perform a machine-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. The attacker can intercept and modify the update server's response to deliver a malicious update file to users.

MitigationImplement proper certificate chain validation and hostname verification in the update mechanism. Use a validated TLS library and ensure the application trusts only properly signed certificates from the expected update server.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm RadiAnt DICOM Viewer is installed
    Check for the application in Program Files (typically C:\Program Files\Medixant\RadiAnt DICOM Viewer) or look for the executable radiantt.exe on the system
    Affected if The software is present on the system, indicating potential exposure to this vulnerability
  2. Identify the installed version
    Open RadiAnt DICOM Viewer, go to Help > About, or right-click radiantt.exe and select Properties > Details to view the File Version
    Affected if The installed version matches any affected version range (check against vendor release notes for versions that may contain the fix)
  3. Verify if automatic updates are enabled
    Launch RadiAnt, go to Help > Check for Updates or examine the application's configuration files in the user data directory (typically %APPDATA%\Medixant\RadiAnt DICOM Viewer)
    Affected if Automatic update checking is enabled and the system has network access, creating the MITM attack surface
  4. Inspect network connection configuration
    Check Windows proxy settings (Control Panel > Internet Options > Connections > LAN settings) and any custom proxy configuration within RadiAnt if exposed in logs or config
    Affected if A proxy or transparent network interception is configured, making the MITM attack more likely to succeed
  5. Review update-related network traffic (if possible)
    Use a network sniffer or logging tool to capture traffic when the update check runs - look for HTTPS connections that may not properly validate server certificates
    Affected if Update requests are sent over HTTPS without proper certificate chain validation, which is the core vulnerability

A user is affected if they have RadiAnt DICOM Viewer installed with automatic updates enabled and the installed version lacks proper SSL/TLS certificate validation in the update mechanism.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement proper certificate chain validation and hostname verification in the update mechanism. Use a validated TLS library and ensure the application trusts only properly signed certificates from the expected update server.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,640
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-1001 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-1001 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data