CVE-2025-58428
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 · uneditedThe TLS4B ATG system's SOAP-based interface is vulnerable due to its accessibility through the web services handler. This vulnerability enables remote attackers with valid credentials to execute system-level commands on the underlying Linux system. This could allow the attacker to achieve remote command execution, full shell access, and potential lateral movement within the network.
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 · moderate confidenceThe TLS4B ATG (Automatic Tank Gauging) system contains a critical vulnerability in its SOAP-based web services interface. Attackers with valid credentials can inject and execute arbitrary system commands on the underlying Linux operating system through the accessible web services handler, achieving remote command execution and potentially full system compromise.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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.
-
Confirm TLS4B ATG installationIdentify if the TLS4B Automatic Tank Gauging system is installed in your environment. Check for the product binary, service, or associated web application files on the target system.Affected if TLS4B ATG software is present on the system
-
Verify SOAP web services interface is enabledLocate the SOAP web services handler configuration file or check if the /soap or equivalent web services endpoint is accessible and responding on the TLS4B web interface.Affected if The SOAP web services interface is exposed and operational
-
Check for configured credentialsExamine the TLS4B configuration for user accounts or credentials that have access to the SOAP web services. Look for user authentication settings in the config database or configuration files.Affected if Valid user credentials exist for accessing the SOAP interface
-
Test for command injection vulnerabilitySend a specially crafted SOAP request with a test command (such as 'id' or 'echo test') in a parameter field to the web services endpoint and observe if the command executes and returns output.Affected if Arbitrary system commands execute through SOAP request parameters
-
Assess network accessibilityDetermine if the SOAP web services port/endpoint is reachable from network segments outside the tank gauging control network. Check firewall rules and exposed network interfaces.Affected if The SOAP interface is accessible from untrusted network segments
If the TLS4B ATG system is running with its SOAP web services interface enabled and accessible, and arbitrary commands can be executed through SOAP request parameters, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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.
From vendor dataRestrict access to the SOAP web services interface to authorized personnel only, implement strict input validation on all SOAP request parameters, and apply vendor patches if available. Consider network segmentation to limit exposure of this interface.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-58428 — 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-2025-58428 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