CVE-2025-47751
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 VS6EditData!CDataRomErrorCheck::MacroCommandCheck 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 VS6EditData module's CDataRomErrorCheck::MacroCommandCheck function. Opening specially crafted V7 or V8 files triggers improper bounds checking during macro command processing, allowing memory corruption leading to crash, 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.
-
Identify installed Monitouch V Sft versionLocate the V-SFT application in the program directory and check its version properties (typically via right-click > Properties > Details, or by locating the main executable and viewing its file version info). Compare the version number against the affected range: 6.0.1.0 through 6.2.5.0 inclusive.Affected if The installed version falls within >= 6.0.1.0 and < 6.2.6.0.
-
Verify VS6EditData module presenceSearch the V-SFT installation directory for the file VS6EditData.dll or a module with similar naming (such as VS6EditData.exe or a module containing 'CDataRomErrorCheck' in its metadata). The presence of this module indicates the vulnerable component is installed.Affected if The VS6EditData module exists in the V-SFT installation directory.
-
Confirm V7/V8 file handling is enabledCheck the V-SFT configuration settings or file association settings to determine whether the application is configured to open V7 or V8 file types. This can be verified through the software's options/settings menu, or by checking if .v7/.v8 file extensions are associated with the application.Affected if V-SFT is configured to handle or open V7/V8 file types.
-
Audit recent V7/V8 file activityReview application logs, recent documents, or Windows recent file lists for any recently opened .v7 or .v8 project files. Check the application's file history or temporary directories for traces of such files being processed.Affected if V7 or V8 files have been opened recently using the affected software.
The environment is affected if V-SFT version is >= 6.0.1.0 and < 6.2.6.0, the VS6EditData module is present, and V7/V8 file handling is enabled or such files have been opened.
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
Restrict opening of untrusted V7/V8 files until vendor patch is available; implement file validation and sandboxing as compensating controls.
V-SFT version 6.2.6.0
- Identify all systems with Monitouch V-SFT (V6) installed
- Check current version by opening V-SFT and navigating to Help > About or the version information dialog
- Navigate to the official Fuji Electric Monitouch support website (monitouch.fujielectric.com) or JVN reference (jvn.jp) to obtain version 6.2.6.0
- Close any running instances of V-SFT
- Run the version 6.2.6.0 installer and follow the on-screen prompts to upgrade
- After installation, verify the new version is 6.2.6.0 or later by checking Help > About
- Do not open any untrusted V7 or V8 project files until the upgrade is complete
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47751 — 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-2025-47751 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