CVE-2025-52222
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 · uneditedD-Link DI-8003 v16.07.26A1, DI-8500 v16.07.26A1; DI-8003G v17.12.21A1, DI-8200G v17.12.20A1, DI-8200 v16.07.26A1, DI-8400 v16.07.26A1, DI-8004w v16.07.26A1, DI-8100 v16.07.26A1, and DI-8100G v17.12.20A1 were discovered to contain a buffer overflow via the rd_en, rd_auth, rd_acct, http_hadmin, http_hadminpwd, rd_key, and rd_ip parameters in the radius_asp function. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via a crafted request.
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the radius_asp function of multiple D-Link router models (DI-8003, DI-8500, DI-8003G, DI-8200G, DI-8200, DI-8400, DI-8004w, DI-8100, DI-8100G). The vulnerable parameters (rd_en, rd_auth, rd_acct, http_hadmin, http_hadminpwd, rd_key, rd_ip) do not properly validate input length before copying to fixed-size buffers, allowing attackers to send crafted requests that overflow the buffer and cause denial of service.
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= 16.07.26a1= 17.12.20a1= 16.07.26a1= 17.12.21a1= 16.07.26a1= 16.07.26a1= 17.12.20a1= 16.07.26a1CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 device model and firmware versionAccess the router web management interface and navigate to Status or System Information page to view the exact model number (e.g., DI-8100, DI-8200) and firmware version string. Alternatively, check the login page source or use Nmap with service detection to probe the HTTP service.Affected if The model matches one of: DI-8003, DI-8500, DI-8003G, DI-8200G, DI-8200, DI-8400, DI-8004w, DI-8100, DI-8100G AND firmware version equals 16.07.26a1, 17.12.20a1, or 17.12.21a1.
-
Confirm RADIUS feature is enabledLog into the router web interface and navigate to the RADIUS or AAA configuration section (usually under Security, Authentication, or Network Settings). Check whether RADIUS authentication is enabled or configured.Affected if RADIUS authentication (rd_en) or accounting (rd_acct) is enabled with parameters rd_auth, rd_acct, rd_key, rd_ip configured.
-
Check for web admin account configurationNavigate to the Administration or User Management section of the router web interface. Look for http_hadmin and http_hadminpwd parameters which may be visible in the configuration or may appear in URL parameters during save operations.Affected if Administrative accounts are configured through the web interface using the affected parameters.
-
Verify management interface exposureScan the router's external IP or network perimeter using a port scanner to determine if the HTTP management port (typically 80 or 8080) is accessible from untrusted networks. Use command: nmap -p 80,443,8080 <router-ip>Affected if The router web management interface is exposed to the internet or untrusted LAN segments.
The device is affected if it is a D-Link DI-series model (DI-8003, DI-8500, DI-8003G, DI-8200G, DI-8200, DI-8400, DI-8004w, DI-8100, DI-8100G) running firmware version 16.07.26a1, 17.12.20a1, or 17.12.21a1, with RADIUS or web admin features configured and accessible.
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 · scopedApply vendor-supplied firmware patches when available. If no patch exists, consider network segmentation, restricting administrative access to trusted IPs, or replacing affected devices. Disable the RADIUS administrative features if not required.
- These D-Link DI series routers (DI-8003, DI-8003G, DI-8200, DI-8200G, DI-8500, DI-8004w, DI-8100, DI-8100G) are end-of-life or near end-of-life with firmware from 2016-2017.
- No patched firmware versions are referenced in the CVE description or associated sources.
- The most effective remediation is to replace affected devices with currently supported models that receive regular security updates.
- If replacement is not immediately feasible, restrict network access to the management interface by placing it behind a firewall or VPN, limiting exposure to untrusted networks.
- Disable the RADIUS functionality if not required, as the vulnerable radius_asp function is the attack vector.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 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 $2,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-52222 — 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-2025-52222 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