VulnerabilityPublished 3 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-27456: Endress+Hauser MEAC300-FNADE4 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts

Affects Endress+Hauser MEAC300-FNADE4Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:55 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: 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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 3 Jul 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 effectively, European organizations should implement several targeted measures beyond generic advice: 1) Network Segmentation: Isolate MEAC300-FNADE4 devices within dedicated, secured network segments with strict access controls to limit exposure to untrusted networks. 2) Access Control Lists (ACLs): Apply ACLs on network devices to restrict SMB access to known, authorized management stations or control systems only. 3) Monitoring and Alerting: Deploy intrusion detection systems (IDS) or security information and event management (SIEM) solutions to monitor for repeated failed authentication attempts against these devices and generate alerts for potential brute-force activity. 4) Credential Management: Enforce strong, unique passwords for device accounts and rotate them regularly to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 5) Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): Where possible, implement MFA for device access to add an additional layer of security beyond passwords. 6) Vendor Engagement: Engage with Endress+Hauser to obtain patches or firmware updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available. 7) Temporary Workarounds: If patches are unavailable, consider disabling SMB services on these devices if not essential or restricting SMB traffic via firewall rules. 8) Incident Response Preparedness: Prepare response plans for potential compromise scenarios involving these devices, including containment and recovery procedures.

Description

The SMB server's login mechanism does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame, making it susceptible to brute-force attacks.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in industrial sectors such as manufacturing, utilities, and process automation that deploy Endress+Hauser MEAC300-FNADE4 devices, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Unauthorized access via brute-force attacks could lead to exposure of sensitive process data or unauthorized control commands, potentially disrupting critical infrastructure operations. Given the device's role in industrial environments, confidentiality breaches could also lead to intellectual property theft or competitive disadvantage. While the vulnerability does not directly affect system integrity or availability, gaining unauthorized access could be a stepping stone for further attacks, including lateral movement within networks or sabotage. European organizations with interconnected industrial control systems (ICS) and operational technology (OT) environments may face increased risk if these devices are accessible from less secure network segments or the internet. The absence of known exploits offers a window for proactive mitigation, but the high severity score underscores the urgency of addressing this issue to prevent potential future exploitation.

Summary

CVE-2025-27456 is a high-severity vulnerability affecting the Endress+Hauser MEAC300-FNADE4 device, specifically its SMB server login mechanism. The core issue is an improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts (CWE-307), meaning the system does not adequately limit the number or rate of failed login attempts. This flaw allows an attacker to perform brute-force attacks remotely over the network without requiring any privileges or user interaction. The vulnerability has a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5, reflecting its network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction needed. The impact is primarily on confidentiality, as successful brute-force attacks could allow unauthorized access to the device, potentially exposing sensitive operational data or control interfaces. The integrity and availability impacts are not directly indicated. The vulnerability affects all versions of the MEAC300-FNADE4 product line, indicating a broad exposure. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild, and no patches have been published yet. The device is used in industrial environments, likely in process automation or monitoring, where unauthorized access could lead to operational disruptions or data leakage. The lack of throttling or lockout mechanisms for failed authentication attempts significantly increases the risk of credential compromise through automated guessing attacks.

CWE-307Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame.
Architecture and Design
Common protection mechanisms include: Disconnecting the user after a small number of failed attempts; Implementing a timeout; Locking out a targeted account; Requiring a computational task on the user's part.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Dictionary-based Password Attack (opens in a new tab)
Password Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Password Spraying (opens in a new tab)
Credential Stuffing (opens in a new tab)
Use of Known Kerberos Credentials (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 3 Jul 2025, 11:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-307

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats