FKIE_CVE-2025-2516

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2025-03-27 15:16 - Updated: 2026-06-17 09:07
Severity
9.5 (Critical) - CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/U:Amber
Summary
The use of a weak cryptographic key pair in the signature verification process in WPS Office (Kingsoft) on Windows allows an attacker who successfully recovered the private key to sign components. As older versions of WPS Office did not validate the update server's certificate, an Adversary-In-The-Middle attack was possible allowing updates to be hijacked.
References
security@eset.comhttps://www.welivesecurity.com/en/eset-research/nspx30-sophisticated-aitm-enabled-implant-evolving-since-2005/
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://www.wps.com/",
          "defaultStatus": "unknown",
          "platforms": [
            "Windows"
          ],
          "product": "WPS Office",
          "vendor": "Kingsoft",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "unknown",
              "version": "12.1.0.18276",
              "versionType": "custom"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@eset.com"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The use of a weak cryptographic key pair in the signature verification process in WPS Office (Kingsoft) on Windows allows an attacker who successfully recovered the private key to sign components.\n\nAs older versions of WPS Office did not validate the update server\u0027s certificate, an Adversary-In-The-Middle attack was possible allowing updates to be hijacked."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "El uso de un par de claves criptogr\u00e1ficas d\u00e9biles en el proceso de verificaci\u00f3n de firmas de WPS Office (Kingsoft) en Windows permite que un atacante que haya recuperado la clave privada firme componentes. Dado que las versiones anteriores de WPS Office no validaban el certificado del servidor de actualizaciones, era posible un ataque de intermediario que permitiera el secuestro de actualizaciones."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2025-2516",
  "lastModified": "2026-06-17T09:07:05.833",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV40": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackRequirements": "NONE",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "baseScore": 9.5,
          "baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
          "confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "providerUrgency": "AMBER",
          "subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "subConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Amber",
          "version": "4.0",
          "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
        },
        "source": "security@eset.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2025-2516",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "poc"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "total"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2025-03-27T15:15:47.648387Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2025-03-27T15:16:01.280",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@eset.com",
      "url": "https://www.welivesecurity.com/en/eset-research/nspx30-sophisticated-aitm-enabled-implant-evolving-since-2005/"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@eset.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-326"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@eset.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.