CVE-2025-6811
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 · uneditedMescius ActiveReports.NET TypeResolutionService Deserialization of Untrusted Data Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Mescius ActiveReports.NET. Interaction with this library is required to exploit this vulnerability but attack vectors may vary depending on the implementation. The specific flaw exists within the TypeResolutionService class. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in deserialization of untrusted data. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-25397.
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 vulnerability exists in the TypeResolutionService class of Mescius ActiveReports.NET. It results from insufficient validation of user-supplied data during deserialization operations, allowing remote attackers to inject malicious serialized objects and achieve arbitrary code execution in the context of the current process.
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= 18.1.1CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Mescius ActiveReports.NET versionCheck the installed assembly version of Mescius.ActiveReports.dll in the application bin directory or check the installed packages via NuGet package manager, project references, or the Windows Programs and Features listAffected if The installed version is 18.1.1 specifically, as this is the only affected version listed
-
Determine if TypeResolutionService is in useSearch project source code for usage of TypeResolutionService class, or inspect the application configuration files and runtime assemblies to see if this service is instantiated or configuredAffected if The TypeResolutionService class is loaded, referenced, or actively used in the application runtime
-
Identify deserialization entry pointsSearch code for deserialization patterns: BinaryFormatter, NetDataContractSerializer, XmlSerializer, JSON deserialization of untrusted input, or any custom deserialization logic that processes user-supplied dataAffected if The application performs deserialization on data originating from external or untrusted sources without strict type validation
-
Review type resolution configurationInspect application configuration files, any custom type resolution settings, or serialization-related configuration that controls which types can be instantiated during deserializationAffected if Type resolution allows arbitrary types or lacks an allowlist restriction, enabling injection of malicious serialized objects
-
Audit network-facing deserialization endpointsIdentify and examine any web API endpoints, file upload handlers, or network services that accept serialized data (JSON, XML, binary) from clientsAffected if The application accepts and deserializes serialized data from remote clients without strict type validation
The environment is affected if Mescius ActiveReports.NET version 18.1.1 is installed AND TypeResolutionService is used while the application deserializes untrusted data without strict allowlist-based type validation.
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 or disable the TypeResolutionService if not required, implement strict allowlist-based type validation before deserialization, and apply vendor-provided patches when available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-6811 — 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-2025-6811 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