CVE-2025-67187
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 · uneditedA stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability was identified in TOTOLINK A950RG V4.1.2cu.5204_B20210112. The flaw exists in the setIpQosRules interface of /lib/cste_modules/firewall.so where the comment parameter is not properly validated for length.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in TOTOLINK A950RG router firmware v4.1.2cu.5204_B20210112. The vulnerability exists in the setIpQosRules function within the firewall.so module where the 'comment' parameter is not properly validated for length, allowing an attacker to overwrite stack memory and potentially execute arbitrary code.
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= 4.1.2cu.5204_b20210112CVSS 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:3.1/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify firmware versionAccess the router's web管理界面 (typically at 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) and navigate to System > Firmware Upgrade, or use the command 'cat /proc/version' via telnet/SSH if available. Alternatively, extract the firmware binary and search for the version string.Affected if The firmware version is exactly 4.1.2cu.5204_B20210112
-
Locate firewall.so moduleIf you have firmware binary access, extract the firmware image and search for the file 'firewall.so' within the /lib or /usr/lib directory structure.Affected if The firewall.so module exists in the firmware build at the expected path (typically /lib/firewall.so or /usr/lib/firewall.so)
-
Verify setIpQosRules function presenceUse strings or binwalk to analyze firewall.so and search for the string 'setIpQosRules' within the binary.Affected if The function symbol 'setIpQosRules' is present in the firewall.so module
-
Check web interface QoS configuration availabilityAccess the router web UI and navigate to the QoS or Bandwidth Control settings page (typically under Bandwidth Management > IP QoS).Affected if The IP QoS or QoS configuration interface is accessible and accepts a 'comment' or 'description' parameter
The device is affected if the firmware version is exactly 4.1.2cu.5204_B20210112 and the IP QoS feature with its comment parameter is accessible through the web management interface.
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 dataApply vendor firmware patch when available; otherwise restrict network exposure to the device's management interface and consider network segmentation to limit attack surface.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-67187 — 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-2025-67187 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