CVE-2025-14096VulnerabilityPublished 17 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-14096: Radiometer Medical Aps ABL90 FLEX and ABL90 FLEX PLUS Analyzers · Use of Hard-coded Credentials

Affects Radiometer Medical Aps ABL90 FLEX and ABL90 FLEX PLUS AnalyzersSource CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.4 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.4High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 2% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Dec 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 2026-10-26.

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

AI-suggested

1. Enforce strict physical security controls around all ABL90 FLEX and ABL90 FLEX PLUS analyzers to ensure only authorized personnel can access the devices. 2. Implement access logging and monitoring in clinical areas to detect unauthorized physical access attempts. 3. Coordinate promptly with Radiometer representatives to obtain and apply permanent fixes or firmware updates once available. 4. Consider network segmentation to isolate analyzers from broader hospital networks, limiting lateral movement if a device is compromised. 5. Conduct regular security training for healthcare staff emphasizing the importance of physical device security. 6. Evaluate the feasibility of upgrading or replacing devices running unsupported operating systems with more secure alternatives. 7. Maintain an inventory of all affected devices and track remediation status. 8. Review and enhance endpoint security policies to include medical device protection. 9. Prepare incident response plans specific to medical device compromise scenarios. 10. Engage with regulatory bodies to ensure compliance with medical device security standards and reporting requirements.

Description

A vulnerability exists in multiple Radiometer products that allow an attacker with physical access to the analyzer possibility to extract credential information. The vulnerability is due to a weakness in the design and insufficient credential protection in operating system. Other related CVE's are CVE-2025-14095 & CVE-2025-14097. Affected customers have been informed about this vulnerability. This CVE is being published to provide transparency. Required Configuration for Exposure: Attacker requires physical access to the analyzer. Temporary work Around: Only authorized people can physically access the analyzer. Permanent solution: Local Radiometer representatives will contact all affected customers to discuss a permanent solution. Exploit Status: Researchers have provided a working proof-of-concept (PoC). Radiometer is not aware of any public exploit code at the time of this publication.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly healthcare providers, this vulnerability poses significant risks. The ABL90 FLEX analyzers are used in clinical settings for critical blood gas analysis, and compromise could lead to unauthorized access to patient data, manipulation of diagnostic results, or denial of service. Such impacts could undermine patient safety, violate data protection regulations like GDPR, and disrupt clinical workflows. The requirement for physical access somewhat limits the threat to insiders or attackers with physical proximity, but healthcare environments often have multiple personnel with device access, increasing risk. Additionally, the use of legacy Windows operating systems means these devices may be more susceptible to other attacks if compromised. The reputational damage and regulatory consequences of a breach involving medical devices are severe. European healthcare institutions must prioritize securing physical access and coordinate with Radiometer for updates to prevent exploitation. Failure to address this vulnerability could lead to targeted attacks against critical healthcare infrastructure, especially in countries with advanced medical services and high Radiometer device adoption.

Summary

CVE-2025-14096 identifies a critical security vulnerability in Radiometer Medical Aps’ ABL90 FLEX and ABL90 FLEX PLUS blood gas analyzers, which run on legacy Windows 7 and Windows XP operating systems. The vulnerability stems from the use of hard-coded credentials embedded within the device’s operating system, a design weakness classified under CWE-798 (Use of Hard-coded Credentials) and CWE-250 (Execution with Unnecessary Privileges). An attacker who gains physical access to the analyzer can extract these credentials, potentially allowing unauthorized access to the device’s system and sensitive medical data. The flaw compromises confidentiality by exposing credential information, integrity by enabling unauthorized system modifications, and availability by potentially disrupting device operations. The vulnerability requires no user interaction or prior authentication but does require physical access, limiting remote exploitation. Radiometer has informed affected customers and is working on permanent fixes, although no patches have been publicly released yet. Researchers have demonstrated a proof-of-concept exploit, but no known public exploits are currently active. The vulnerability is exacerbated by the use of outdated operating systems, which may lack modern security controls. This issue highlights the risks of embedded medical devices relying on legacy software and insufficient credential management.

CWE-798Use of Hard-coded Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key.
Architecture and Design
For outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320).
Architecture and Design
For inbound authentication: Rather than hard-code a default username and password, key, or other authentication credentials for first time logins, utilize a "first login" mode that requires the user to enter a unique strong password or key.
Architecture and Design
If the product must contain hard-coded credentials or they cannot be removed, perform access control checks and limit which entities can access the feature that requires the hard-coded credentials. For example, a feature might only be enabled through the system console instead of through a network connection.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.4 (opens in a new tab)
V6.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Read Sensitive Constants Within an Executable (opens in a new tab)
Try Common or Default Usernames and Passwords (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-250Execution with Unnecessary Privileges (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product performs an operation at a privilege level that is higher than the minimum level required, which creates new weaknesses or amplifies the consequences of other weaknesses.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Identify the functionality that requires additional privileges, such as access to privileged operating system resources. Wrap and centralize this functionality if possible, and isolate the privileged code as much as possible from other code.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Identify the functionality that requires additional privileges, such as access to privileged operating system resources. Wrap and centralize this functionality if possible, and isolate the privileged code as much as possible from other code.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Vulnerable Dependency Management (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.14.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V14.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
Target Programs with Elevated Privileges (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

radiometer.com/myradiometer (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Dec 2025, 13:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-798, CWE-250

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats