Incorrect Privilege AssignmentWeakness · CWE-266

CVE-2025-57797

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2025-08-27
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
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
Incorrect privilege assignment vulnerability exists in ScanSnap Manager installers versions prior to V6.5L61. If this vulnerability is exploited, an authenticated local attacker may escalate privileges and execute an arbitrary command.

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

A local privilege escalation vulnerability in ScanSnap Manager installers prior to version V6.5L61 allows an authenticated local attacker to gain elevated privileges and execute arbitrary commands due to incorrect privilege assignment during the installation process.

MitigationUpdate ScanSnap Manager to version V6.5L61 or later to remediate the vulnerability.

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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. Verify ScanSnap Manager is installed
    Check for ScanSnap Manager installation on the system. Look for the application in Program Files or Program Files (x86) directories, or check the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Fujitsu\ScanSnap for the InstallPath value.
    Affected if ScanSnap Manager is found on the system
  2. Identify the installed ScanSnap Manager version
    Locate the ScanSnap Manager executable or check the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Fujitsu\ScanSnap for a Version or DisplayVersion entry. Common paths include C:\Program Files\Fujitsu\ScanSnap\ or C:\Program Files (x86)\Fujitsu\ScanSnap\.
    Affected if A version entry exists but cannot be read or is missing
  3. Compare installed version to V6.5L61
    If a version is found, compare it numerically to V6.5L61. Any version prior to V6.5L61 (including V6.5L60, V6.5L50, earlier V6.x releases, or any V5.x versions) is considered vulnerable.
    Affected if The installed version is earlier than V6.5L61
  4. Check for presence of installer files
    Search for ScanSnap installer files (.exe or .msi) on the system, particularly in temporary directories, download folders, or installer cache locations. Look for files with names like ScanSnap*Setup*.exe or similar.
    Affected if Installer files with versions prior to V6.5L61 are found on the system

The system is affected if ScanSnap Manager version V6.5L61 or later is NOT installed; any version prior to V6.5L61 is vulnerable to local privilege escalation during installation.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Update ScanSnap Manager to version V6.5L61 or later to remediate the vulnerability.

Recommended fix High confidence

V6.5L61 or later

  1. Identify the current version of ScanSnap Manager installed on the system
  2. Download ScanSnap Manager version V6.5L61 or later from the official PFU/Ricoh website (www.pfu.ricoh.com)
  3. Uninstall the current version of ScanSnap Manager
  4. Install the downloaded version V6.5L61 or later
  5. Restart the computer if prompted by the installer
  6. Verify the installed version is V6.5L61 or later
Caveat Uninstalling and reinstalling ScanSnap Manager may reset application settings; back up any custom configurations if possible

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,980
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,168.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-57797 — 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-2025-57797 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