CVE-2025-41730
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 · uneditedAn unauthenticated remote attacker can abuse unsafe sscanf calls within the check_account() function to write arbitrary data into fixed-size stack buffers which leads to full device compromise.
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 confidenceAn unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit unsafe sscanf calls within the check_account() function to perform stack-based buffer overflows, allowing arbitrary data to be written beyond buffer boundaries. This memory corruption leads to full device compromise, likely through code execution on the stack.
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< 02.64< 02.64CVSS 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 the device modelLocate the Wago device model number on the hardware label or via the device's web interface or management console. Confirm it is either model 0852 1328 or 0852 1322.Affected if The device is a Wago 0852 1328 or 0852 1322 unit.
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the device's web interface, management console, or use the vendor-provided tool (such as WAGO I/O Check or PFC Firmware Update Tool) to retrieve the current firmware version. Compare it against the affected version threshold of 02.64.Affected if The firmware version is below 02.64 (for example, 02.63, 02.60, etc.).
-
Identify the check_account service availabilityDetermine if the device exposes any network service (such as HTTP, HTTPS, or a proprietary protocol) that utilizes the check_account() function. Review network configuration and firewall rules to see if remote unauthenticated access to this service is possible.Affected if The check_account() function is accessible over the network without authentication and the firmware version is below 02.64.
-
Review network exposure of management interfacesScan the device's open ports and services using a network scanner. Check if port 80, 443, or other management ports are exposed to untrusted networks. Verify if the device is behind a properly configured firewall.Affected if Management interfaces containing the vulnerable check_account() function are exposed to untrusted networks and the firmware version is below 02.64.
You are affected if your Wago 0852 1328 or 0852 1322 device runs firmware version below 02.64 and the check_account() function is network-accessible without authentication.
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.
dbcve · scoped02.64
Replace unsafe sscanf calls in check_account() with bounds-checked alternatives (e.g., snprintf with width specifiers, or explicit length validation before sscanf) and implement proper input validation. Given the critical CVSS and device compromise scope, a firmware update with thorough regression testing is required.
Firmware 02.64 for models 0852 1328 and 0852 1322
- Identify the specific device model (0852 1328 or 0852 1322) requiring remediation
- Access the device administration interface or CLI to determine the current firmware version
- Obtain firmware version 02.64 or later from the official vendor support portal or trusted distribution channel
- Backup the current device configuration if supported by the platform
- Upload and apply firmware version 02.64 following the vendor's documented upgrade procedure (typically via web UI, TFTP, or USB)
- Allow the device to fully reboot and complete the firmware installation process
- Verify the device is running firmware version 02.64 or later
- Confirm the check_account() function is no longer accessible to unauthenticated users
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-41730 — 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-2025-41730 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