CVE-2025-27716
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 limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') issue exists in the file/folder listing process of the USB storage file-sharing function of HGW-BL1500HM Ver 002.002.003 and earlier. If this vulnerability is exploited, the product's files may be obtained and/or altered by a crafted HTTP request to specific functions of the product from a device connected to the LAN side.
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 · moderate confidenceA path traversal vulnerability exists in the USB storage file-sharing function of HGW-BL1500HM routers (versions 002.002.003 and earlier). Attackers on the LAN side can craft HTTP requests with directory traversal sequences (e.g., '../') to bypass path restrictions and access or modify files outside the intended USB storage directory.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify device modelCheck the router model number in the web administration interface (usually at http://192.168.1.1) under Status, System Info, or Device Info pages. Look for 'HGW-BL1500HM' in the model or product name field.Affected if Device is NOT an HGW-BL1500HM router (different models are not affected by this specific CVE)
-
Check firmware versionIn the router web interface, navigate to Administration, Firmware Upgrade, or System Info section. Locate the firmware version field. Compare the version number to '002.002.003' using standard version comparison (e.g., 002.002.003, 002.002.002, 002.001.000 are all vulnerable; versions above 002.002.003 are not).Affected if Firmware version is 002.002.003 or earlier (e.g., 002.002.002, 002.001.005, etc.)
-
Verify USB storage is in useCheck if a USB storage device is physically connected to the router and if the USB storage sharing feature is enabled in the router settings. Look for USB, Storage, or File Sharing settings in the web interface.Affected if USB storage sharing is enabled and a USB drive is connected - without this, the vulnerable code path is not reachable
-
Confirm file-sharing HTTP interface is accessibleAttempt to access the file-sharing web interface by navigating to the router's IP address with the file-sharing path (commonly /usb or /storage in the URL). Check if the interface responds to HTTP requests.Affected if The USB file-sharing HTTP interface is exposed and reachable from the LAN side
You are affected if you own an HGW-BL1500HM router with firmware version 002.002.003 or earlier AND have the USB storage file-sharing feature enabled and accessible from your LAN.
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 dataApply any available vendor firmware updates. If no update exists, implement strict input validation to reject path traversal sequences ('../', '..\') and enforce canonicalization of file paths before use.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-27716 — 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-2025-27716 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