CVE-2025-3845
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 markparticle WebServer up to 1.0. It has been declared as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is the function Buffer::HasWritten of the file code/buffer/buffer.cpp. The manipulation of the argument writePos_ leads to buffer overflow. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Buffer::HasWritten function in markparticle WebServer up to v1.0, where improper bounds validation of the writePos_ argument allows writing beyond buffer boundaries, potentially enabling remote code execution on affected servers.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 if Markparticle WebServer is installedSearch for markparticle binary or service: which markparticle, ps aux | grep markparticle, or check common installation directories like /usr/local/bin/, /opt/, /etc/init.d/Affected if Markparticle WebServer binary or service is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionRun: markparticle -v or markparticle --version, or check version in any configuration files or package metadataAffected if Version is v1.0 or any version up to v1.0 (all versions are affected)
-
Locate the Buffer::HasWritten function in the binaryUse strings or nm/objdump to search for 'HasWritten' symbol in the markparticle binary: nm markparticle | grep HasWritten or strings markparticle | grep -i HasWrittenAffected if The HasWritten symbol is present in the binary, indicating vulnerable code is compiled in
-
Check for buffer configuration filesInspect configuration files in the markparticle installation directory for any buffer size or write-related settings that could interact with the HasWritten functionAffected if Buffer-related configuration exists and writePos_ values can be controlled via client requests
-
Verify if the server accepts external connectionsCheck network listening status: netstat -tulpn | grep markparticle or ss -tulpn | grep markparticleAffected if Server is listening on network ports, allowing potential remote exploitation of the buffer overflow
If Markparticle WebServer is present and the HasWritten function exists in the binary, the environment is affected by this vulnerability since all versions up to v1.0 are impacted.
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 dataImplement proper bounds checking on the writePos_ parameter in the Buffer::HasWritten function and validate all buffer index values before performing write operations; upgrade to a patched version if available.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,816.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-3845 — 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-2025-3845 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