CVE-2025-9189
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 · uneditedThere is an out of bounds write vulnerability due to improper bounds checking resulting in a large destination address when parsing a DSB file with Digilent DASYLab. This vulnerability may result in arbitrary code execution. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to get a user to open a specially crafted DSB file. The vulnerability affects all versions of DASYLab.
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 confidenceAn out-of-bounds write vulnerability exists in Digilent DASYLab when parsing DSB files due to improper bounds checking. The vulnerability allows a large destination address to be written to, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution when a user opens a specially crafted DSB file.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Verify if DASYLab is installedCheck the system for DASYLab installation: Look for 'DASyLab' or 'Ni Dasylab' in Program Files, Program Files (x86), or use system inventory tools to detect the software. On Windows, check the registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall for DASYLab entries.Affected if DASyLab or Ni Dasylab software is present on the system
-
Identify DSB file associationCheck if .dsb file extension is associated with DASYLab. On Windows, examine the registry under HKCR\.dsb or HKLM\SOFTWARE\Classes\.dsb to see the associated application.Affected if The .dsb file extension is registered to open with DASYLab
-
Check DASYLab DSB import functionalityWithin the DASYLab application, verify if the DSB import or file parsing module is enabled. Check application settings, preferences, or configuration files for DSB-related import handlers.Affected if DSB file parsing capability is enabled in DASYLab configuration
-
Review recent DSB file accessExamine Windows Event Logs (Application and Security logs), browser download history, file explorer recent files, or email attachments for evidence of .dsb file opening activity.Affected if A .dsb file has been opened or processed by the DASYLab application
If DASYLab is installed with DSB file handling enabled and any DSB file has been opened, 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 dataUntil a vendor patch is available, implement defense-in-depth controls: disable or restrict file associations for DSB files, train users to not open untrusted DSB files, and consider application whitelisting. Verify with the vendor for available updates.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9189 — 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-2025-9189 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