Improper Input ValidationWeakness · CWE-20

CVE-2025-41379

MEDIUM · 6.3 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-05-23
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The Intellian C700 web panel allows you to add firewall rules. Each of these rules has an associated ID, but there is a problem when adding a new rule, the ID used to create the database entry may be different from the JSON ID. If the rule needs to be deleted later, the system will use the JSON ID and therefore fail. This can be exploited by an attacker to create rules that cannot be deleted unless the device is reset to factory defaults.

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 confidence

In the Intellian C700 web panel's firewall rule management, there is an ID mismatch between the database entry ID and the JSON ID when adding new rules. When a rule is created, the system uses a different ID for the database record than what is stored in the JSON response. During deletion operations, the system references the JSON ID, causing the delete operation to fail because it cannot find the matching database record. This results in permanent firewall rules that can only be removed via factory reset.

MitigationApply vendor patch when available. Until then, limit administrative access to the web panel to trusted personnel only, as the vulnerability requires authenticated access to 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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the Intellian C700 web panel
    Access the web interface of the device and confirm it is an Intellian C700 by checking the login page or system information section for the model identifier
    Affected if The device is an Intellian C700 with a web management interface
  2. Locate firewall rule management
    Navigate to the firewall or network security settings within the C700 web panel to find the rule management interface
    Affected if Firewall rule creation/deletion features are present and accessible in the web panel
  3. Create a test firewall rule
    Use the web panel to add a new firewall rule (e.g., block a specific port or IP), then note the JSON response ID returned by the system
    Affected if The system accepts a new rule and returns a JSON response with a rule ID
  4. Attempt to delete the created rule
    Use the web panel's delete function on the rule you just created, referencing the JSON ID from the previous response
    Affected if The delete operation appears to execute but the rule persists in the rule list after deletion is attempted
  5. Verify rule persistence
    Refresh the firewall rule list and confirm the test rule still exists despite receiving a deletion confirmation message
    Affected if The firewall rule cannot be removed through the web panel interface and remains visible

A user is affected if they can create a firewall rule in the Intellian C700 web panel but cannot delete it through normal interface operations, resulting in orphaned rules that persist.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor patch when available. Until then, limit administrative access to the web panel to trusted personnel only, as the vulnerability requires authenticated access to exploit.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-41379 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-41379 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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