OS Command InjectionWeakness · CWE-78

CVE-2025-48501

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2025-07-07
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges 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
An OS command injection issue exists in Nimesa Backup and Recovery v2.3 and v2.4. If this vulnerability is exploited, an arbitrary OS commands may be executed on the server where the product is running.

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

Nimesa Backup and Recovery versions 2.3 and 2.4 contain an OS command injection vulnerability that allows attackers to execute arbitrary operating system commands on the server hosting the application. This occurs due to insufficient input validation when processing user-supplied data that gets passed to system calls.

MitigationApply vendor patches immediately when available. In the interim, restrict network access to the Nimesa management interface to trusted IPs only, and review input handling in the application's backend to identify and neutralize the injection point.

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
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/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 checks

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

  1. Identify installed Nimesa version
    Locate the Nimesa installation directory and check the version file, startup logs, or the application's web interface footer which typically displays the version number. Common paths include /opt/nimesa or the application logs directory.
    Affected if The installed version is 2.3 or 2.4 (command injection vulnerability present in these versions only)
  2. Verify Nimesa management service is running
    Check if the Nimesa application server process is running and identify the listening ports. Use commands like 'netstat -tlnp' or 'ss -tlnp' to list active network listeners, looking for the Nimesa web interface port (commonly 8080, 8443, or configured custom ports).
    Affected if The Nimesa management service is actively running and listening on a network port (the vulnerable interface is exposed)
  3. Determine network exposure of management interface
    Review the application's server configuration files or check which address the service is bound to (0.0.0.0 for all interfaces vs 127.0.0.1 for local-only). Inspect firewall rules to confirm whether the management port is accessible from external or untrusted networks.
    Affected if The management interface is bound to 0.0.0.0 or otherwise accessible from untrusted network segments (potential remote exploitation path exists)
  4. Inspect application logs for suspicious activity
    Examine Nimesa application logs (typically in /opt/nimesa/logs or the configured log directory) for unusual patterns such as shell metacharacters (;, |, &, $(), backticks) in request parameters, unexpected command executions, or privilege escalation indicators.
    Affected if Logs contain entries with shell command syntax, injection attempts, or unexpected command executions in the context of user-supplied input fields

A user is affected if they are running Nimesa version 2.3 or 2.4 with the management interface network-accessible to untrusted parties, as the OS command injection flaw can then be exploited remotely.

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 patches immediately when available. In the interim, restrict network access to the Nimesa management interface to trusted IPs only, and review input handling in the application's backend to identify and neutralize the injection point.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-48501 — 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-2025-48501 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