CVE-2025-10327 is a security vulnerability identified in the MiczFlor RPi-Jukebox-RFID software, versions up to 2.8.0. This product is an open-source jukebox system designed for Raspberry Pi devices, often used for RFID-triggered music playback. The vulnerability exists in the /htdocs/api/playlist/shuffle.php file, specifically in the handling of the 'playlist' argument. Improper sanitization or validation of this input allows an attacker to perform OS command injection remotely. This means that an attacker can craft malicious input that gets executed as a system-level command on the underlying operating system hosting the jukebox software. The vulnerability requires no user interaction and no authentication, making it remotely exploitable over the network. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 5.3 (medium severity), reflecting that the attack vector is network-based, with low attack complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction needed. However, the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is limited to low, suggesting that while the attacker can execute commands, the scope or impact of those commands may be constrained by the environment or user permissions under which the software runs. The vendor was notified but did not respond, and no patches or mitigations have been published at the time of disclosure. The exploit code has been made publicly available, increasing the risk of exploitation by attackers. This vulnerability is significant because it affects a niche but potentially widely deployed IoT/music system on Raspberry Pi devices, which are popular in hobbyist and some commercial environments. The lack of vendor response and patch availability increases the urgency for users to implement alternative mitigations or consider discontinuing use until a fix is available.

For European organizations, the impact depends on the extent to which RPi-Jukebox-RFID is deployed within their environments. While primarily a niche product, it may be used in public venues, retail stores, museums, or other cultural institutions that utilize Raspberry Pi-based audio systems. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary commands on the device, potentially leading to unauthorized access to local networks, pivoting to other systems, or disruption of audio services. Given the low integrity and availability impact rating, the direct damage might be limited to the device itself, but the risk of lateral movement or information disclosure cannot be discounted. Moreover, if these devices are connected to sensitive networks or used in critical infrastructure settings, the risk escalates. The public availability of exploit code increases the likelihood of opportunistic attacks, especially in environments with weak network segmentation or insufficient monitoring. The lack of vendor patching means organizations must rely on compensating controls. Overall, the threat poses a moderate risk to European organizations using this software, particularly those in sectors where Raspberry Pi devices are integrated into operational technology or customer-facing systems.

1. Network Segmentation: Isolate Raspberry Pi devices running RPi-Jukebox-RFID from critical network segments to limit potential lateral movement in case of compromise. 2. Access Controls: Restrict network access to the jukebox device’s management interfaces, allowing only trusted IP addresses or VPN connections. 3. Input Filtering: If feasible, implement web application firewalls (WAFs) or reverse proxies that can detect and block suspicious command injection patterns targeting the /api/playlist/shuffle.php endpoint. 4. Monitoring and Logging: Enable detailed logging on the device and network to detect anomalous command executions or unusual traffic patterns. 5. Disable or Remove Unnecessary Services: Minimize the attack surface by disabling any unused features or services on the Raspberry Pi. 6. Device Hardening: Run the jukebox software with the least privileges possible, ideally in a containerized or sandboxed environment to limit the impact of command injection. 7. Vendor Engagement: Continuously monitor for vendor updates or community patches and apply them promptly once available. 8. Consider Alternative Solutions: If mitigation is not feasible, evaluate replacing the vulnerable system with a more secure alternative until a patch is released.