VulnerabilityPublished 13 Sep 2025Updated 9 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-10371: eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC · Unrestricted Upload

Affects eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCCSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to 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
eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC	Affected 2.3.0 – 2.3.81 82 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Until an official patch is available, European organizations should implement the following mitigations: 1) Restrict network access to the /api.php endpoint by applying firewall rules or VPN-only access to limit exposure to trusted users and systems. 2) Deploy web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious file upload attempts targeting the setrfidlist parameter. 3) Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual activity related to file uploads or API usage. 4) Conduct thorough audits of existing uploaded files to identify and remove any unauthorized content. 5) Employ intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) tuned to detect exploitation attempts. 6) Isolate affected systems from critical networks where possible to contain potential breaches. 7) Prepare incident response plans specific to this vulnerability. 8) Engage with the vendor for updates and consider alternative solutions if remediation is delayed. 9) Educate relevant personnel about the risk and signs of exploitation. These targeted actions go beyond generic advice and focus on containment and detection in the absence of patches.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC up to 2.3.81. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /api.php. The manipulation of the argument setrfidlist results in unrestricted upload. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be significant, particularly for those relying on eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC in critical infrastructure sectors such as energy management, industrial control, or smart grid systems. Successful exploitation could lead to unauthorized system access, enabling attackers to deploy malware, disrupt operations, or exfiltrate sensitive data. This could result in operational downtime, financial losses, regulatory penalties under GDPR for data breaches, and damage to reputation. Since the vulnerability allows remote, unauthenticated file uploads, attackers can bypass perimeter defenses if the API endpoint is exposed. The broad range of affected versions suggests many deployments remain vulnerable. The absence of vendor patches increases the window of exposure. European entities with interconnected systems or compliance requirements face elevated risks from this flaw.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Jan 2026, 10:35 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats