VulnerabilityPublished 31 Oct 2025Updated 18 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-12357: ISO 15118-2 Network and Application Protocol Requirements EV Car Chargers · CWE-923

Affects ISO 15118-2 Network and Application Protocol Requirements EV Car ChargersSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.7% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 55% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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 impacted component.
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 on the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 31 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

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should implement a multi-layered security approach. First, physical security controls should be enhanced around EV charging stations to limit unauthorized proximity access, including surveillance and access restrictions. Network segmentation should be employed to isolate charging infrastructure from critical enterprise networks, reducing the potential impact of a compromise. Monitoring and anomaly detection systems should be configured to identify unusual SLAC protocol traffic patterns or unexpected signal characteristics indicative of spoofing attempts. Vendors and operators should prioritize firmware and software updates as soon as patches become available, ensuring compliance with the latest security standards. Additionally, implementing cryptographic enhancements or mutual authentication mechanisms at the protocol level could reduce the risk of MitM attacks. Training personnel on the risks associated with EV charging infrastructure and establishing incident response plans specific to these systems will further strengthen defenses. Collaboration with industry groups and standards bodies to accelerate security improvements in ISO 15118-2 implementations is also recommended.

Description

CVE-2025-12357 is a medium-severity vulnerability in the ISO 15118-2 protocol used by electric vehicle (EV) chargers. It involves manipulation of the Signal Level Attenuation Characterization (SLAC) protocol via spoofed measurements, enabling a man-in-the-middle (MitM) attack between an EV and its charger. The attack can be conducted wirelessly within close proximity through electromagnetic induction, without requiring authentication or user interaction. This vulnerability impacts confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the charging communication, potentially allowing attackers to intercept or alter charging commands and data. No known exploits are currently in the wild, and no patches have been published yet. Organizations deploying ISO 15118-2 compliant EV chargers should prioritize mitigation to prevent unauthorized access and data manipulation. Countries with significant EV adoption and infrastructure, such as the United States, Germany, China, Japan, and others, are at higher risk. The vulnerability’s CVSS score is 6.3, reflecting medium severity due to its remote attack vector but limited scope and impact. Defenders should implement network segmentation, monitor for anomalous SLAC traffic, and apply vendor updates once available.

Impact

The vulnerability poses a significant risk to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of communications between electric vehicles and charging stations. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to intercept sensitive data such as authentication credentials or billing information, manipulate charging commands to disrupt or alter charging sessions, or cause denial of service by interfering with the communication protocol. This could result in financial losses, operational disruptions, and erosion of user trust in EV infrastructure. Given the increasing adoption of EVs globally and reliance on ISO 15118-2 compliant chargers, the impact could be widespread, affecting individual consumers, fleet operators, and public charging networks. Moreover, the wireless nature of the attack within close proximity raises concerns about physical security and the need for secure environments around charging stations. Although no exploits are currently known, the vulnerability could be leveraged by attackers with physical access to charging areas, including malicious insiders or opportunistic attackers in public spaces. The medium severity score reflects the balance between the attack feasibility and the limited range of impact, but the strategic importance of EV infrastructure elevates the overall risk profile.

Summary

CVE-2025-12357 identifies a vulnerability in the ISO 15118-2 standard, which governs network and application protocol requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging systems. The flaw arises from the ability of an attacker to manipulate the Signal Level Attenuation Characterization (SLAC) protocol, which is used to establish and maintain secure communication channels between EVs and charging stations. By injecting spoofed SLAC measurements, an attacker can perform a man-in-the-middle (MitM) attack, intercepting and potentially altering data exchanged during the charging session. This attack vector is notable because it can be executed wirelessly within close physical proximity, leveraging electromagnetic induction to communicate with the charging system without direct physical connections or prior authentication. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-923, indicating improper use of a communication channel or protocol leading to security weaknesses. The CVSS 3.1 base score of 6.3 reflects a medium severity, with an attack vector requiring adjacent network access (AV:A), low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges required (PR:N), and no user interaction (UI:N). The impact affects confidentiality, integrity, and availability, but the scope remains unchanged (S:U). Currently, there are no known exploits in the wild, and no patches have been released, highlighting the need for proactive defensive measures. This vulnerability could undermine the trustworthiness of EV charging infrastructure, potentially leading to unauthorized data interception, manipulation of charging parameters, or denial of service conditions.

CWE-923Improper Restriction of Communication Channel to Intended Endpoints (opens in a new tab)
Class weakness
The product establishes a communication channel to (or from) an endpoint for privileged or protected operations, but it does not properly ensure that it is communicating with the correct endpoint.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Contradictory Destinations in Traffic Routing Schemes (opens in a new tab)
Android Activity Hijack (opens in a new tab)
DHCP Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Infrastructure Manipulation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Mar 2026, 01:00 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-923

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats