CVE-2025-12381
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 · uneditedImproper Privilege Management vulnerability in AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer on Linux, 64 bit allows Privilege Escalation, Parameter Injection. A local user with access to the command line may escalate their privileges by abusing the parameters of a command that is approved in the sudoers file. This issue affects Firewall Analyzer: A33.0, A33.10.
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 confidenceImproper Privilege Management in AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer allows a local user with sudo access to escalate privileges by injecting malicious parameters into commands permitted in the sudoers file. This is a classic sudo privilege escalation where the sudoers configuration allows a command without properly restricting or validating the arguments that can be passed.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= a33.0= a33.10CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer versionRun the command to display the installed version of AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer (e.g., 'dpkg -l | grep algosec', 'rpm -qi algosec-firewall-analyzer', or check the product's About/Version UI).Affected if The installed version is exactly a33.0 or a33.10.
-
Locate sudoers configuration filesExamine /etc/sudoers and any included files in /etc/sudoers.d/ for entries related to AlgoSec or the affected product user accounts.Affected if There are sudoers entries that grant sudo access to AlgoSec-related commands or scripts.
-
Inspect sudoers command argumentsReview each AlgoSec-related sudoers entry for whether the command specification allows arbitrary arguments (e.g., uses wildcard (*) or lacks explicit argument restrictions).Affected if The sudoers configuration permits the sudo-enabled command to accept user-supplied arguments without strict validation.
-
Verify command path restrictionsCheck if the sudoers entries use full absolute paths to binaries or scripts, and whether they restrict or forbid passing additional arguments after the command.Affected if The sudoers entries do not enforce full command path restrictions or explicitly disallow argument passing.
A user is affected if AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer version a33.0 or a33.10 is installed AND the sudoers configuration contains entries that grant sudo access to AlgoSec commands without properly restricting or validating arguments.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataReview and harden the sudoers configuration to remove or strictly restrict commands that allow parameter injection. Implement full command path restrictions and disallow argument passing for sudo-enabled commands.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-12381 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-12381 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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