CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2025-10774

CVE-2025-10774 — Ruijie 6000-E10 sub_commit.php os command injection

A weakness has been identified in Ruijie 6000-E10 up to 2.4.3.6-20171117. This affects an unknown part of the file /view/vpn/autovpn/sub_commit.php. This manipulation of the argument key causes os command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, VulDB

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

4%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

ruijie

6000_e10

CVSS base

4.7

MEDIUM

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

ruijie

Products (1)

6000 e10

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
4.7CVSS 3.1MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-78
  • CWE-77

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /view/vpn/autovpn/sub_commit.php.

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • ruijieevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-78other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.