Classic Buffer OverflowWeakness · CWE-120

CVE-2025-69674

MEDIUM · 6.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-02-19
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
66/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in CDATA FD614GS3-R850 V3.2.7_P161006 (Build.0333.250211) allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the node_mac, node_opt, opt_param, and domainblk parameters of the mesh_node_config and domiainblk_config modules

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 confidence

Buffer overflow vulnerability in CDATA FD614GS3-R850 router firmware (v3.2.7_P161006) in the mesh_node_config and domainblk_config modules. The node_mac, node_opt, opt_param, and domainblk parameters fail to properly validate input length, allowing an attacker to overflow buffers and achieve arbitrary code execution.

MitigationApply vendor firmware patch when available; if no patch exists, restrict network access to the device and disable untrusted network-facing services to reduce attack surface.

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
Adjacent
Complexity
High
Privileges
High
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/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. Identify firmware version
    Access the router administration interface or check system information page to determine the installed firmware version. This is typically found under System, Status, or About sections of the web UI, or via CLI command 'show version' or 'cat /proc/version' if SSH/telnet access is available.
    Affected if The installed firmware version is v3.2.7_P161006 (exact match) or falls within the affected version range around this release.
  2. Confirm mesh networking feature is enabled
    Locate the mesh networking configuration settings in the router web interface or configuration files. Look for mesh_node_config module settings, typically under Wireless, Mesh, or Network settings.
    Affected if Mesh networking feature is enabled and mesh_node_config module is active on the device.
  3. Identify access to domainblk_config module
    Check the router configuration for domain blocking (domainblk) settings. This may appear under Firewall, Access Control, Blocking, or Security configuration sections in the web UI or config files.
    Affected if Domain blocking (domainblk_config) module is accessible or enabled in the router configuration.
  4. Inspect vulnerable parameters
    Examine the configuration values for node_mac, node_opt, opt_param, and domainblk parameters if present. These are passed to the mesh_node_config and domainblk_config modules. Check if long or malformed input strings can be supplied to these parameters.
    Affected if The router allows user-controllable input to these parameters without length validation, or if you can observe that input length is not checked before buffer operations.

The device is affected if it is running firmware version v3.2.7_P161006 (or a version in that release lineage) AND has either the mesh networking feature or domain blocking configuration module accessible/enabled.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply vendor firmware patch when available; if no patch exists, restrict network access to the device and disable untrusted network-facing services to reduce attack surface.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69674 — 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-2025-69674 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