VulnerabilityPublished 12 Oct 2025Updated 17 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11641: Tomofun Furbo 360 · Improper Access Controls

Affects Tomofun Furbo 360Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 1.0 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

1.0Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Physical
Attack Complexity: High
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

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable system. Physical interaction may be brief (e.g., evil maid attack) or persistent.
Attack Complexity: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 12 Oct 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
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), 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

AI-suggested

Given the absence of vendor patches, European organizations and users should focus on physical security controls to mitigate this vulnerability. This includes restricting physical access to Furbo 360 and Furbo Mini devices, especially in shared or public spaces. Deploy devices in locked or monitored areas to prevent unauthorized manipulation. Regularly inspect devices for signs of tampering. Network segmentation can limit potential lateral movement if devices are compromised. Monitoring device behavior for anomalies may help detect exploitation attempts. Organizations should maintain an inventory of deployed Furbo devices and firmware versions to assess exposure. Engage with the vendor persistently for updates or patches. Consider disabling or removing devices in high-risk environments until a fix is available. Finally, educate users about the risks of physical access attacks on IoT devices and enforce policies accordingly.

Description

A vulnerability was determined in Tomofun Furbo 360 and Furbo Mini. This impacts an unknown function of the component Trial Restriction Handler. This manipulation causes improper access controls. It is feasible to perform the attack on the physical device. The attack is considered to have high complexity. The exploitability is said to be difficult. The firmware versions determined to be affected are Furbo 360 up to FB0035_FW_036 and Furbo Mini up to MC0020_FW_074. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-11641 is limited but not negligible. Since the vulnerability requires physical access and has high complexity, it is unlikely to be exploited in large-scale attacks or remotely. However, in environments where Furbo devices are deployed in accessible locations—such as offices, retail spaces, or public areas—an attacker could potentially manipulate device restrictions or functionality. This could lead to unauthorized use or denial of service of the device, impacting operational convenience or monitoring capabilities. The vulnerability does not appear to compromise user privacy or network security directly. Nevertheless, organizations with strict IoT security policies or those using these devices in sensitive environments should consider the risk. The lack of vendor response and absence of patches increase the risk of prolonged exposure. Additionally, the presence of these devices in private homes or small businesses across Europe could pose a minor risk if physical security is lax.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Oct 2025, 19:03 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats