CVE-2025-2956
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was found in TRENDnet TI-G102i 1.0.7.S0_ /1.0.8.S0_ and classified as problematic. This issue affects the function plugins_call_handle_uri_raw of the file /usr/sbin/lighttpd of the component HTTP Request Handler. The manipulation leads to null pointer dereference. The attack can only be done within the local network. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 null pointer dereference vulnerability exists in the lighttpd HTTP server component of TRENDnet TI-G102i industrial gigabit injectors (firmware 1.0.7.S0_ and 1.0.8.S0_). The vulnerability is in the plugins_call_handle_uri_raw function when handling certain HTTP URIs, allowing an attacker on the local network to crash the HTTP service via the publicly disclosed exploit.
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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 the device modelAccess the device's web management interface or check the physical device label to confirm it is a TRENDnet TI-G102i industrial gigabit injectorAffected if the device is not a TRENDnet TI-G102i, then this specific CVE does not apply
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the device's web interface and navigate to the Status or System Information page to view the installed firmware versionAffected if the firmware version is 1.0.7.S0_ or 1.0.8.S0_, the device is running an affected version
-
Verify HTTP service is accessibleAttempt to access the device's HTTP management interface by entering the device's IP address in a web browser. Confirm the service responds to HTTP requestsAffected if the HTTP service is accessible and the firmware version is 1.0.7.S0_ or 1.0.8.S0_, the vulnerability can be exploited by a local network attacker
-
Check for HTTP service crashesIf previously able to access the web interface, attempt to reconnect. A crashed HTTP service will not respond to HTTP requestsAffected if the HTTP service is unresponsive and the device has firmware version 1.0.7.S0_ or 1.0.8.S0_, the device may have been exploited via this CVE
A user is affected if they have a TRENDnet TI-G102i device running firmware version 1.0.7.S0_ or 1.0.8.S0_ with the HTTP management interface accessible to the network segment where an attacker resides.
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 the vendor did not respond and no patch is available, mitigate by restricting network access to the device's management interface via VLAN segmentation or firewall rules, and evaluate device replacement if end-of-life.
- 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-2025-2956 — 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-2025-2956 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