CVE-2025-47750
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 · uneditedV-SFT v6.2.5.0 and earlier contains an issue with out-of-bounds write in VS6MemInIF!set_temp_type_default function. Opening specially crafted V7 or V8 files may lead to crash, information disclosure, and arbitrary code execution.
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 confidenceV-SFT v6.2.5.0 and earlier contains an out-of-bounds write vulnerability in the VS6MemInIF!set_temp_type_default function. Processing specially crafted V7 or V8 files triggers the bounds error, leading to potential heap corruption which can cause crashes, information disclosure, or arbitrary code execution.
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>= 6.0.1.0, < 6.2.6.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Verify Monitouch V Sft is installedCheck the system for the presence of Monitouch V Sft or V-SFT software by looking in installed programs list, common installation directories, or by searching for executable files related to V-SFT or Fujielectric productsAffected if The software is found installed on the system
-
Determine installed V-SFT versionLocate the V-SFT executable and check its version information (right-click properties in Windows, or use command line version query tools if available). Compare the version against the affected range: >= 6.0.1.0 and < 6.2.6.0Affected if The installed version is 6.0.1.0 through 6.2.5.0 inclusive
-
Identify vulnerable moduleInspect the installed V-SFT installation directory for the presence of the VS6MemInIF module or DLL that contains the set_temp_type_default functionAffected if The vulnerable module VS6MemInIF with set_temp_type_default is present in the installation
-
Check V7/V8 file handling capabilityDetermine if the V-SFT installation includes functionality to process V7 or V8 project files - this may be observable through file type associations, import options, or documentation within the softwareAffected if V7 or V8 file processing features are available and enabled in the installation
-
Review for crash logs or anomaliesCheck application logs, Windows Event Viewer, or crash dump files for any recent crashes or errors related to V-SFT processing project files, particularly V7 or V8 formatsAffected if Recent crashes or heap corruption indicators appear in logs after opening V7 or V8 files
A system is affected if Monitouch V Sft is installed with a version between 6.0.1.0 and 6.2.5.0 inclusive and the software is used to process V7 or V8 project files.
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 · scoped6.2.6.0
Update V-SFT to a version beyond v6.2.5.0 when a patch is released. Until then, avoid opening V7 or V8 files from untrusted sources and consider deploying the software in sandboxed or restricted environments.
V-SFT version 6.2.6.0
- 1. Identify all systems running Monitouch V-SFT (V-SFT) version 6.0.1.0 through 6.2.5.0
- 2. Obtain the fixed V-SFT version 6.2.6.0 from the official vendor source (monitouch.fujielectric.com)
- 3. Backup all current V-SFT project files and configurations
- 4. Install V-SFT version 6.2.6.0 on all affected systems
- 5. Verify that the update was successful by checking the installed version
- 6. Test that existing V7 and V8 project files open correctly in the updated software
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47750 — 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-2025-47750 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