VulnerabilityPublished 13 Sep 2025Updated 15 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-10367: MiczFlor RPi-Jukebox-RFID · Cross-site Scripting

Affects MiczFlor RPi-Jukebox-RFIDSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 13 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
MiczFlor RPi-Jukebox-RFID	Affected 2.0 – 2.8.0 9 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should take the following specific actions: 1) Immediately restrict access to the web interface of RPi-Jukebox-RFID devices to trusted networks or VPNs to reduce exposure to remote attackers. 2) Implement web application firewalls (WAF) or intrusion detection systems (IDS) that can detect and block common XSS attack patterns targeting the cardEdit.php endpoint. 3) Educate users on the risks of interacting with suspicious links or inputs related to the jukebox interface to reduce the likelihood of successful user interaction exploitation. 4) If feasible, review and sanitize all user inputs manually or via custom scripts until an official patch is available, focusing on the cardEdit.php functionality. 5) Monitor network traffic and logs for unusual activity related to these devices, especially attempts to access or manipulate the cardEdit.php page. 6) Consider isolating Raspberry Pi devices running this software on segmented VLANs to limit potential lateral movement. 7) Regularly check for vendor updates or community patches and apply them promptly once available. 8) If the device is not critical, consider discontinuing use until a secure version is released.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in MiczFlor RPi-Jukebox-RFID up to 2.8.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /htdocs/cardEdit.php. Such manipulation leads to cross site scripting. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, the direct impact of this vulnerability is likely limited due to the niche usage of RPi-Jukebox-RFID primarily in hobbyist or small-scale environments rather than critical infrastructure. However, organizations using Raspberry Pi devices with this software in public or semi-public settings (e.g., libraries, community centers, educational institutions) could face risks of session hijacking or defacement, leading to reputational damage or unauthorized access to user sessions. The vulnerability could also be leveraged as a foothold for lateral movement if the device is connected to larger networks without proper segmentation. Additionally, since the vendor has not responded or patched the issue, affected organizations may be exposed for an extended period, increasing the window for potential exploitation. The requirement for user interaction somewhat limits the risk but does not eliminate it, especially in environments where users are less security-aware. Overall, the impact is moderate but should not be ignored in environments where these devices are networked or accessible by multiple users.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Sep 2025, 00:37 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats