CVE-2025-25609
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 · uneditedTOTOlink A3002R V1.1.1-B20200824.0128 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability. The vulnerability arises from the improper input validation of the static_ipv6 parameter in the formIpv6Setup interface of /bin/boa
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the TOTOlink A3002R router's web server (/bin/boa) where the formIpv6Setup interface fails to properly validate the length of the static_ipv6 parameter, allowing an attacker to overflow a fixed-size buffer with excessive input.
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= 1.1.1-b20200824.0128CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 device modelCheck the router model label or access the management interface to confirm it is a TOTOlink A3002R deviceAffected if Device is a TOTOlink A3002R router
-
Check firmware versionAccess the router web interface (typically at 192.168.1.1) and navigate to the firmware/version information page, or check via CLI if accessibleAffected if Firmware version matches 1.1.1-b20200824.0128 exactly
-
Verify web server is accessibleAttempt to access the router's web interface over HTTP or HTTPS (port 80 or 443) from LAN or WAN IPAffected if The web server (/bin/boa) is reachable and responds to requests
-
Confirm IPv6 setup feature existsLook for IPv6 configuration options in the router web interface, specifically a static_ipv6 parameter field in the IPv6 settingsAffected if The formIpv6Setup interface with static_ipv6 parameter is present and accessible
A user is affected if they own a TOTOlink A3002R router running firmware version 1.1.1-b20200824.0128 and can access the web management interface where the vulnerable IPv6 configuration form exists.
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 dataSince this is an end-of-life device with firmware from 2020, the primary mitigation is to replace the device or strictly limit access to the management interface (e.g., disable WAN access, use VPN). If available, apply any vendor firmware updates.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,880.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-25609 — 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-2025-25609 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