Microhard IPn4Gii/Bullet-LTE up to 1.2.0-r1132 AT+MMNAME Command argument injection
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability was found in Microhard IPn4Gii and Bullet-LTE up to 1.2.0-r1132. It has been classified as critical. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component AT+MMNAME Command Handler. The manipulation leads to argument injection. This vulnerability is referenced as CVE-2025-35008. The attack can only be performed from a local environment. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Microhard IPn4Gii and Bullet-LTE up to 1.2.0-r1132. This issue affects an unknown code block of the component AT+MMNAME Command Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a argument injection vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-88. The product constructs a string for a command to be executed by a separate component
in another control sphere, but it does not properly delimit the
intended arguments, options, or switches within that command string. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Products that incorporate the Microhard BulletLTE-NA2 and IPn4Gii-NA2 are vulnerable to a post-authentication command injection issue in the AT+MMNAME command that can lead to privilege escalation. This is an instance of CWE-88, "Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection')," and is estimated as a CVSS 7.1 (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N). This issue has not been generally fixed at the time of this CVE record's first publishing.
The weakness was published by Ricky Lawshae. The advisory is shared at takeonme.org. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2025-35008 since 04/15/2025. The exploitation is known to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1059 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at EUVD (EUVD-2025-17400). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.1
VulDB Base Score: 5.3
VulDB Temp Score: 5.1
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 7.1
CNA Vector (AHA): 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Argument injectionCWE: CWE-88 / CWE-74 / CWE-707
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: No
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
04/15/2025 🔍06/09/2025 🔍
06/09/2025 🔍
01/12/2026 🔍
Sources
Advisory: takeonme.orgResearcher: Ricky Lawshae
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2025-35008 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-35008
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-311645
EUVD: 🔍
Entry
Created: 06/09/2025 07:16Updated: 01/12/2026 18:00
Changes: 06/09/2025 07:16 (63), 06/09/2025 08:22 (1), 01/12/2026 18:00 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.