Delta Electronics has published an advisory warning that its COMMGR engineering and simulation software contains multiple high‑severity vulnerabilities — including a stack‑based buffer overflow (CVE‑2025‑53418) and a code‑injection flaw (CVE‑2025‑53419) — that affect COMMGR versions up to and including v2.9.0 and can lead to arbitrary code execution unless mitigated; Delta’s advisory and follow‑on vulnerability records place the practical risk to industrial and critical‑manufacturing deployments in the high‑to‑critical band.
Delta Electronics’ COMMGR is a communications management and PLC‑simulation component used widely in industrial automation engineering workflows. The product family has a long history of security advisories (including earlier buffer‑overflow fixes in 2018 and subsequent advisories) and remains deployed across critical manufacturing environments worldwide.
This most recent coordinated disclosure groups at least two distinct weaknesses:
Patch deployment to COMMGR v2.10.0 (or later) is the primary and immediate remedy; however, operators must combine patching with segmentation, file‑handling controls, endpoint hardening, and monitoring to reduce residual risk. Public vulnerability records (NVD, Tenable, CVE aggregators) confirm the CVE assignments and technical vectors reported by the vendor, but some metadata (such as vendor‑calculated CVSS v4 values and individual researcher attributions) should be treated as vendor‑supplied until independent CNA or ZDI public advisories confirm those exact details. (nvd.nist.gov, tenable.com, zerodayinitiative.com)
Organizations that run COMMGR in production or engineering environments must prioritize patching, verify that no engineering artifacts or older install media remain in circulation, and update incident response playbooks to include COMMGR‑specific containment and forensic steps. Time is the critical factor: unpatched, reachable systems present an attractive target for opportunistic attackers and for criminals looking to weaponize tooling against critical manufacturing infrastructure.
Conclusion
Delta’s advisory on COMMGR exposes a tangible and immediate risk to engineering workstations and control‑network interfaces. The vulnerabilities (CVE‑2025‑53418 and CVE‑2025‑53419) have been recorded by public CVE/NVD feeds and independent security trackers; a vendor patch (COMMGR v2.10.0) is available and should be applied as the primary corrective action. Defenders must adopt a layered approach — patch quickly, segment aggressively, harden endpoints, and monitor for anomalous activity — to reduce the likelihood that an attacker can exploit these flaws to gain a foothold in industrial environments. (nvd.nist.gov, tenable.com, cvedetails.com)
Source: CISA Delta Electronics COMMGR | CISA
Background / Overview
Delta Electronics’ COMMGR is a communications management and PLC‑simulation component used widely in industrial automation engineering workflows. The product family has a long history of security advisories (including earlier buffer‑overflow fixes in 2018 and subsequent advisories) and remains deployed across critical manufacturing environments worldwide. This most recent coordinated disclosure groups at least two distinct weaknesses:
- a stack‑based buffer overflow that can be triggered by specially crafted .isp files and may be exploited over the network, and
- an improper control of code generation / code‑injection condition also triggered by malicious .isp inputs.
What’s affected
Affected products and versions
- COMMGR: Versions v2.9.0 and prior are listed as affected in the vendor advisory and in public CVE/NVD records. (cvedetails.com, nvd.nist.gov)
Geographic and sector exposure
- COMMGR is used globally in critical manufacturing and other industrial sectors; impacted installations are found worldwide and often reside on engineering workstations and configuration servers that connect to control networks. This broad deployment profile raises the potential operational impact if vulnerabilities are exploited.
Technical details
CVE‑2025‑53418 — Stack‑based buffer overflow (CWE‑121)
- Description: A stack buffer overflow exists in COMMGR’s handling of certain .isp files; a maliciously crafted file can overflow a fixed‑length stack buffer and allow an attacker to overwrite control data. Successful exploitation can result in arbitrary code execution, application crash, or denial of service.
- Key metrics: Public records and vendor material list a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.6 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H). The vendor also calculated a CVSS v4 base score (vendor‑provided CVSS v4 values appear in the advisory). These scores indicate high exploitability and severe availability impact. (cvedetails.com, nvd.nist.gov)
- Attack vector: The vulnerability is described as remotely exploitable over a network interface in typical deployment scenarios, with low attack complexity and no privileges required. This makes pre‑authentication exploitation feasible in exposed environments.
CVE‑2025‑53419 — Code injection (CWE‑94)
- Description: Improper control over generated code leads to a code‑injection condition when COMMGR parses certain crafted .isp project files; a victim opening such a file could cause the application to execute attacker‑provided code.
- Key metrics: Public CVE records list a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). Vendor calculations also present CVSS v4 values in the advisory package. The vector shows the exploit requires some local interaction (opening a file), but the impact to confidentiality, integrity and availability is high. (tenable.com, nvd.nist.gov)
- Attack vector: This is typically a local vector in the sense that user interaction is required (an engineer opens an .isp file), but engineering workstations commonly accept project files from external partners, shared repositories, or email, making social‑engineering or supply‑chain delivery realistic attack paths.
Notes on scoring and provenance
- Public vulnerability databases (NVD, CVEdetails, Tenable) have recorded these CVEs and list vendor advisory material as the primary source; where CVSS v4 values appear they are derived from the vendor’s calculations inside the advisory package. Where a CVSS v4 numeric value is cited, treat it as vendor‑supplied unless an independent CVSS v4 reassessment from a third‑party CNA is published. (nvd.nist.gov, cvedetails.com)
Risk evaluation and likely attack scenarios
Why this matters
- Arbitrary code execution on engineering workstations or COMMGR servers can yield broad operational consequences: manipulation of device configurations, deployment of malicious PLC projects, lateral movement into control networks, and persistent footholds on OT assets.
- The combination of a remotely exploitable overflow and a file‑triggered code injection increases the overall attack surface — attackers can attempt network‑based compromise where reachable or use targeted social engineering (malicious project files) to reach inward‑facing systems. (cvedetails.com, ogma.in)
Realistic attack chains
- Internet‑facing gateway or misconfigured remote access exposes COMMGR to the network. An attacker sends a crafted .isp to the exposed service and triggers CVE‑2025‑53418 remotely to achieve RCE.
- A spear‑phishing or supply‑chain drop places a malicious .isp file in a shared repository. An engineer opens the file during normal work and triggers CVE‑2025‑53419, allowing an attacker to execute code in the engineer’s session and pivot into the OT network.
- Chaining: initial code execution via either CVE can be used to deploy persistence, drop additional tooling, or attempt further exploits across the environment. (tenable.com, cvedetails.com)
Impact to critical infrastructure
- These vulnerabilities chiefly threaten availability and integrity in industrial contexts — the documented buffer overflow emphasizes a high availability impact — but confidentiality can also be affected by code injected payloads exfiltrating data or credentials from engineering hosts. Given COMMGR’s role, the risk to critical manufacturing and industrial automation workflows is material.
Mitigations — vendor recommendations and defensive controls
Vendor update (primary fix)
Delta Electronics recommends updating to COMMGR v2.10.0 or later; the vendor advisory includes a downloadable patched package and remediation steps. Applying the vendor patch is the authoritative fix for these issues. (ogma.in, nvd.nist.gov)Immediate operational mitigations
- Remove or block Internet exposure of COMMGR servers and engineering workstations; treat these assets as sensitive and isolate them behind firewalls.
- Enforce network segmentation: place engineering workstations and COMMGR behind OT‑specific segmentation and restrict inbound/outbound flows to known management endpoints only.
- Implement strict application whitelisting on engineering workstations to block unauthorized executable payloads and scripts.
- Enforce secure transfer channels and verification for project files: leverage signed project repositories, SFTP with strict access controls, and endpoint scanning of incoming .isp files.
Short‑term mitigations if patching is delayed
- Remove or disable network services used by COMMGR that are not needed, or apply host firewall rules to allow only specific trusted management hosts.
- Block common delivery vectors at the perimeter (restrict email attachments, deploy attachment sandboxing for engineering groups).
- Restrict user privileges on engineering hosts and require multi‑factor authentication (MFA) for remote access.
- Monitor for unusual COMMGR process activity, new child processes, or unexpected network connections from engineering workstations; use EDR tooling where available.
Detection and incident response guidance
- Watch for anomalous file opens and unexpected process creations tied to COMMGR (spawned shells, PowerShell, or scripting hosts). Correlate with Windows event logs and EDR telemetry.
- Monitor for unusual outbound connections from engineering workstations to unknown IPs and for any attempts to open or transfer .isp files to untrusted locations.
- If compromise is suspected, isolate the affected workstation(s) from the network, retain forensic copies of memory and disk, and consult ICS/OT incident response procedures that prioritize safety and process continuity. CISA and other national CERTs recommend follow‑up reporting for correlation against other incidents.
Vulnerability provenance, researchers, and verification
- Public vulnerability trackers (NVD, CVEdetails, Tenable) list CVE‑2025‑53418 and CVE‑2025‑53419 and cite vendor advisory material as the canonical source for technical details. These independent trackers corroborate the presence of the two high‑severity issues and the affected versions. (nvd.nist.gov, cvedetails.com, tenable.com)
- Vendor advisory text indicates coordinated disclosure: Delta reported one of the issues through normal channels; the other vulnerability was reported to CISA by a researcher working with the Zero Day Initiative (ZDI) in published timelines. However, specific individual researcher attributions (for example, the name “Mai Mostafa” in some advisory drafts) could not be independently validated across third‑party published advisories at the time of writing; such researcher names are sometimes included in vendor advisories but should be treated as vendor‑supplied attribution unless confirmed by the reporting program’s public advisory list. This article flags those attributions as vendor‑provided and subject to independent verification. (zerodayinitiative.com, nvd.nist.gov)
Critical analysis — strengths, weaknesses, and operational risk
Strengths
- Rapid vendor response: Delta published an advisory and produced a patched release (v2.10.0) that addresses the reported issues; coordinated disclosure with CISA and publication on public CVE and NVD feeds means defenders have actionable information. (ogma.in, nvd.nist.gov)
- Detailed technical indicators: the advisory and public CVE records include CVSS vectors and technical descriptions that allow SOC and OT teams to prioritize detection and mitigation efforts.
Weaknesses and residual risk
- Attack surface persistence: many engineering workstations and offline backups may still contain vulnerable COMMGR binaries (v2.9.0 and earlier) and older images, leaving organizations exposed until those artifacts are found and updated. Legacy images and disaster‑recovery snapshots are commonly overlooked.
- Social‑engineering vector: because one vulnerability requires opening a file, human factors remain a primary risk. Engineering teams routinely exchange project files, so supply‑chain or email‑based distribution of malicious .isp files is feasible and realistic.
- Incomplete independent scoring: some CVSS v4 numbers in public descriptions are vendor‑calculated; independent CNA scoring for CVSS v4 is not universally available at publication time, which can create small discrepancies in severity interpretations. Treat vendor CVSS v4 numbers as vendor assessments until CNA consensus appears.
Practical operational risk summary
- For organizations with exposed COMMGR instances or lax segmentation between engineering and control networks, the combined risk is high: successful exploitation may yield persistent code execution in environments where downtime or altered process logic has direct safety and productivity consequences. For well‑segmented, well‑managed OT environments, the risk is lower but still non‑negligible because of the file‑based attack path and possible supply‑chain exposures.
Recommended step‑by‑step remediation plan (for Windows and OT teams)
- Inventory and prioritize: Identify all hosts with COMMGR installed (engineering workstations, build servers, backup images).
- Apply vendor patch: Upgrade affected COMMGR installations to v2.10.0 or later in a controlled maintenance window; validate installs in a test environment first.
- Replace images: Update any golden images, backups, and offline installers to the patched version.
- Restrict exposure: Immediately block public access to COMMGR services and apply host and network firewalls to limit connectivity to trusted management hosts only.
- Harden endpoints: Enable application whitelisting, restrict scripting hosts, enforce least privilege, and require MFA for remote access to engineering systems.
- File handling controls: Configure email and file‑sharing systems to scan and sandbox .isp files and block unknown attachments to engineering teams.
- Logging and detection: Turn on EDR logging, configure alerts for COMMGR process anomalies, and baseline normal behavior for later comparison.
- Incident readiness: Update runbooks to include COMMGR‑specific containment, and rehearse a recovery scenario that preserves safety and production continuity.
What defenders should watch for in the coming weeks
- Public exploit code: historically, buffer‑overflow and file‑parsing vulnerabilities are prioritized by exploit developers. Monitor security feeds for proof‑of‑concept (PoC) code and threat‑actor chatter. CVE tracking pages and exploit repositories should be watched closely.
- Related Delta advisories: Delta and coordinated vulnerability disclosure programs (CISA, ZDI) may publish additional technical notes or detection signatures; keep vendor bulletins and CISA/ICS advisories in the intake loop. (nvd.nist.gov, zerodayinitiative.com)
Final assessment and editorial note
These COMMGR vulnerabilities are a reminder that engineering software is a critical attack surface in OT environments. The two distinct exploit vectors — a remotely exploitable stack overflow and a user‑triggered code injection — together create multiple practical paths for compromise, from Internet‑facing misconfiguration exploitation to supply‑chain or spear‑phishing attacks against engineering teams.Patch deployment to COMMGR v2.10.0 (or later) is the primary and immediate remedy; however, operators must combine patching with segmentation, file‑handling controls, endpoint hardening, and monitoring to reduce residual risk. Public vulnerability records (NVD, Tenable, CVE aggregators) confirm the CVE assignments and technical vectors reported by the vendor, but some metadata (such as vendor‑calculated CVSS v4 values and individual researcher attributions) should be treated as vendor‑supplied until independent CNA or ZDI public advisories confirm those exact details. (nvd.nist.gov, tenable.com, zerodayinitiative.com)
Organizations that run COMMGR in production or engineering environments must prioritize patching, verify that no engineering artifacts or older install media remain in circulation, and update incident response playbooks to include COMMGR‑specific containment and forensic steps. Time is the critical factor: unpatched, reachable systems present an attractive target for opportunistic attackers and for criminals looking to weaponize tooling against critical manufacturing infrastructure.
Conclusion
Delta’s advisory on COMMGR exposes a tangible and immediate risk to engineering workstations and control‑network interfaces. The vulnerabilities (CVE‑2025‑53418 and CVE‑2025‑53419) have been recorded by public CVE/NVD feeds and independent security trackers; a vendor patch (COMMGR v2.10.0) is available and should be applied as the primary corrective action. Defenders must adopt a layered approach — patch quickly, segment aggressively, harden endpoints, and monitor for anomalous activity — to reduce the likelihood that an attacker can exploit these flaws to gain a foothold in industrial environments. (nvd.nist.gov, tenable.com, cvedetails.com)
Source: CISA Delta Electronics COMMGR | CISA
