CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2025-55423NVD status: Analyzed

N104s-r1 Firmware: Improper Control of Generation of Code

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2025-55423 is a critical-severity improper control of generation of code vulnerability in N104s-r1 Firmware from Iptime, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected N104s-r1 Firmware versions: 9.90.8 through 10.02.2. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 3.74% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is in the top 9.98% of all scored CVEs.

Patch this week

Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.

What to do

  1. Check which version of N104s-r1 Firmware you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on iptime.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
IptimeN104s-r1 Firmware9.90.8 through 10.02.2Not stated
IptimeN104v Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN1e Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN1plus Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN1plus-i Firmware9.99.6 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN1v Firmware11.01.2 through 12.07.6Not stated
IptimeN2e Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN2eplus Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN2plus Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN2plus-i Firmware9.99.6 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN2v Firmware10.09.2 through 12.16.8Not stated
IptimeN2vs Firmware12.16.8Not stated
IptimeN3 Firmware9.93.2 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN3-i Firmware9.99.6 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN5 Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN5-i Firmware9.99.6 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN6 Firmware9.96.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN600 Firmware10.00.8 through 12.16.2Not stated
IptimeN6004r Firmware9.90.8 through 10.02.2Not stated
IptimeN602e Firmware11.96.6 through 12.16.8Not stated
IptimeN602eplus Firmware12.14.2 through 12.16.2Not stated
IptimeN602se Firmware14.19.0 through 14.19.4Not stated
IptimeN604 Black Firmware9.93.8 through 12.16.2Not stated
IptimeN604a Firmware9.90.8 through 10.06.8Not stated
IptimeN604e Firmware10.09.2 through 14.19.4Not stated

Version data comes from NVD's product matching; 35 further products are omitted here. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CISA (ADP).

Official description

A command injection vulnerability exists in the upnp_relay() function in multiple ipTIME router models because the controlURL value used to pass port-forwarding information to an upper router is passed to system() without proper validation or sanitization, allowing OS command injection.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Control of Generation of Code

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
  • Run your code in a jail or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.

More Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities (CWE-94)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Technical write-ups (may include proof of concept)

Recent Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.