CVE-2025-11757VulnerabilityPublished 21 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-11757: CloudEdge App · Improper Neutralization of Wildcards or Matching Symbols

Affects CloudEdge AppSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% 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:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
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: 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: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 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 2026-10-25.

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 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
CloudEdge CloudEdge App	Affected =4.4.2	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-11757, organizations should: 1) Monitor CloudEdge vendor communications and apply security patches immediately once released. 2) Implement strict MQTT topic access controls, ensuring clients can only subscribe to authorized topics without wildcard permissions. 3) Employ input validation and sanitization on MQTT topic strings at the broker and application layers to prevent wildcard abuse. 4) Segment IoT networks to isolate camera devices and MQTT brokers from critical enterprise systems, limiting lateral movement. 5) Use MQTT brokers that support authentication and authorization mechanisms to enforce topic-level permissions. 6) Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on IoT messaging protocols. 7) Educate administrators on secure MQTT configuration best practices. 8) Consider deploying network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) tuned to detect anomalous MQTT subscription patterns. These measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on protocol-specific controls and network architecture adjustments tailored to this vulnerability.

Description

The CloudEdge Cloud does not sanitize the MQTT topic input, which could allow an attacker to leverage the MQTT wildcard to receive all the messages that should be delivered to other users by subscribing to the a MQTT topic. In these messages, the attacker can obtain the credentials and key information to connect to the cameras from peer to peer.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-11757 is substantial, particularly for those deploying CloudEdge IoT cameras in critical infrastructure, corporate environments, or smart city projects. Unauthorized access to camera credentials and keys can lead to privacy violations, espionage, and unauthorized surveillance. Compromised camera feeds may expose sensitive corporate or personal information, undermining GDPR compliance and data protection mandates. Additionally, attackers could leverage intercepted credentials to pivot within networks or disrupt camera operations, affecting availability indirectly. The vulnerability's remote exploitability without authentication increases the attack surface, especially in organizations with exposed MQTT brokers or insufficient network segmentation. The breach of confidentiality could also damage organizational reputation and lead to regulatory penalties. Given the growing reliance on IoT devices in Europe, this vulnerability poses a risk to both private and public sector entities.

CWE-155Improper Neutralization of Wildcards or Matching Symbols (opens in a new tab)
Variant weakness
The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could be interpreted as wildcards or matching symbols when they are sent to a downstream component.
Developers should anticipate that wildcard or matching elements will be injected/removed/manipulated in the input vectors of their product. Use an appropriate combination of denylists and allowlists to ensure only valid, expected and appropriate input is processed by the system.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Implementation · Output Encoding
While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-25-294-05 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Oct 2025, 17:35 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-155

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats