Wing FTP Server Improper Neutralization of Null Byte or NUL Character Vulnerability
Exploited since 2025-07-14. 2 of 8 rule sources name it; Cloudflare blocks by default. Our CRS test: partly blocked.
In Wing FTP Server before 7.4.4. the user and admin web interfaces mishandle '\0' bytes, ultimately allowing injection of arbitrary Lua code into user session files. This can be used to execute arbitrary system commands with the privileges… More
In Wing FTP Server before 7.4.4. the user and admin web interfaces mishandle '\0' bytes, ultimately allowing injection of arbitrary Lua code into user session files. This can be used to execute arbitrary system commands with the privileges of the FTP service (root or SYSTEM by default). This is thus a remote code execution vulnerability that guarantees a total server compromise. This is also exploitable via anonymous FTP accounts.
Edge coverage
Claimed by vendorsAsk Vigil
AI · answers from this pageWorkers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.
Severity, decoded
CVSS 3.1Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability, and the impact can reach components beyond the vulnerable one.
How the score is built
- Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.Network
- Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.Low
- Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.None
- User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.None
- ScopeThe attack can spread beyond the vulnerable component to other parts of the system.Changed
- Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.High
- Integrity impactAn attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.High
- Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HAttackers are exploiting this in the wild.
Attackers can script the attack end to end and hit many targets at once.
A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.
Public exploits
4 found- MetasploitWing FTP Server NULL-byte Authentication Bypass (CVE-2025-47812)2025-06-30 · exploit · rank Excellent · has check
- MetasploitWing FTP Server Authenticated Command Execution2014-06-19 · exploit · rank Excellent · has check
- Exploit-DBWing FTP Server 7.4.3 - Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE)2025-07-02 · remote · multiple
- NucleiCVE-2025-47812.yamldetection template, replayed in our lab
Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.
Timeline
- 2014-06-19Metasploit module publishedWing FTP Server Authenticated Command Execution
- 2025-07-02Exploit published on Exploit-DBWing FTP Server 7.4.3 - Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE)
- 2025-07-10CVE publishedCVE List
- 2025-07-14Added to CISA KEVConfirmed exploitation in the wild
- 2025-07-21Cloudflare ships a ruleWing FTP Server - Remote Code Execution - CVE:CVE-2025-47812
- 2025-08-15F5 ships a ruleWing FTP Remote Code Execution
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked part of itparanoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked part of itparanoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
First rule 2025-07-21, 11 days after the CVE was published.
Wing FTP Server - Remote Code Execution - CVE:CVE-2025-47812. Previous action: Log. New action: Block. This is a New Detection
AWSAWS WAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.
Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.
Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.
FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patches
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)
First rule 2025-08-15, 36 days after the CVE was published.
Added: signature 200204025 "Wing FTP Remote Code Execution" (Server Side Code Injection, risk High), systems: Other Web Server. References: CVE-2025-47812.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)
This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.
OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.
Social
No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.