CVE-2025-27250VulnerabilityPublished 12 Aug 2025Updated 13 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-27250: Edge Orchestrator software · Denial of Service

Affects Edge Orchestrator softwareSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium : upgrade to 24.11.1 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 10% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 24.11.1

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
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: Adjacent: The vulnerable system is bound to a protocol 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 proximity (e.g., Bluetooth, NFC, or IEEE 802.11) or logical network (e.g., local IP subnet), or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN within an administrative network zone).
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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 Aug 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

Upgrade Edge Orchestrator software to 24.11.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Edge Orchestrator software	Affected <24.11.1	Fixed in 24.11.1

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement strict network segmentation to limit adjacent network access to the Edge Orchestrator, ensuring only trusted and authenticated devices can communicate with it. Monitoring and logging of access to the Edge Orchestrator should be enhanced to detect unusual resource consumption patterns indicative of exploitation attempts. If you cannot patch yet, applying compensating controls such as rate limiting, resource quotas, or process isolation may help mitigate the risk. Organizations should also enforce strong authentication mechanisms and regularly audit user privileges to minimize the risk of insider exploitation. Once Intel releases a patch for version 24.11.1 or later, prompt deployment is critical. Additionally, organizations should review their incident response plans to include scenarios involving edge orchestration service disruption and conduct tabletop exercises to prepare for potential DoS incidents.

Description

Uncontrolled resource consumption for some Edge Orchestrator software before version 24.11.1 for Intel(R) Tiber(TM) Edge Platform may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via adjacent access.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those deploying Intel Tiber Edge Platforms for industrial automation, smart city infrastructure, or telecommunications, this vulnerability could lead to significant operational disruptions. A denial of service on the Edge Orchestrator could halt edge workload management, impacting critical services such as manufacturing process controls, traffic management systems, or localized data analytics. The requirement for authenticated adjacent access somewhat limits the attack surface to internal or trusted network segments, but insider threats or compromised internal devices could exploit this vulnerability. The medium severity rating reflects the moderate impact on availability without direct compromise of data confidentiality or integrity. However, in sectors where edge computing is integral to safety or real-time operations, even temporary outages could have cascading effects on service delivery and compliance with regulatory requirements such as GDPR or NIS Directive mandates for network and information system security.

References

intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-01317.html (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Aug 2025, 01:45 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats