CVE-2025-9731
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 vulnerability was determined in Tenda AC9 15.03.05.19. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /etc_ro/shadow of the component Administrative Interface. This manipulation causes hard-coded credentials. It is possible to launch the attack on the local host. The attack's complexity is rated as high. The exploitability is regarded as difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
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 confidenceTenda AC9 router firmware 15.03.05.19 contains hard-coded credentials embedded in the /etc_ro/shadow file of the administrative interface. This read-only shadow file stores password hashes, meaning default administrative credentials are baked directly into the firmware image, allowing authenticated access to the router's web management interface.
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= 15.03.05.19CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/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 the router modelLog into the router's web management interface or check the device label to confirm it is a Tenda AC9 modelAffected if The device is a Tenda AC9 router
-
Check the firmware versionNavigate to the router's admin interface (typically at 192.168.0.1) and look for a System Status or Firmware Version section, or use the 'telnet' command to access the device and run 'cat /proc/version' or check /etc_ro/lighttpd-versionAffected if The firmware version is exactly 15.03.05.19
-
Inspect the shadow file for hard-coded credentialsExtract the firmware image from the router (via telnet/SSH if enabled, or by downloading the firmware .bin file from Tenda and using binwalk to extract) and examine the /etc_ro/shadow file for default or hard-coded password hashesAffected if The /etc_ro/shadow file contains default or hard-coded password hashes that persist across firmware updates or are identical for all devices of this version
-
Test for default administrative credentialsAttempt to log into the router's web interface using common default credentials (admin:admin, admin:password, admin:123456)Affected if Any of these default credentials successfully grant access to the administrative 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 dataUpdate router firmware to the latest version once available from Tenda; if no patch exists, consider replacing the device or implementing network segmentation to limit exposure to local attackers.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9731 — 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-2025-9731 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