VulnerabilityPublished 6 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-36513: Surveillance cameras provided by i-PRO Co., Ltd. · Cross-site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Affects Surveillance cameras provided by i-PRO Co., Ltd.Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:08 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 3% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 6 Jun 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 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

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Immediately check for and apply any vendor-provided patches or firmware updates addressing this CSRF vulnerability once available. 2) Restrict access to the surveillance camera management interfaces to trusted networks and users only, ideally via VPN or secure management VLANs, to reduce exposure to malicious web content. 3) Educate users with access to these devices about the risks of visiting untrusted websites while logged into surveillance camera interfaces. 4) Employ network-level protections such as web filtering to block access to known malicious sites that could host CSRF attack pages. 5) Where possible, disable or limit web interface access and use alternative secure management protocols. 6) Monitor device logs for unusual configuration changes that could indicate exploitation attempts. 7) Advocate with the vendor for implementation of robust CSRF protections, including anti-CSRF tokens and same-site cookie attributes in future firmware releases.

Description

Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in surveillance cameras provided by i-PRO Co., Ltd.. If a user views a crafted page while logged in to the affected product, unintended operations may be performed.

Impact

For European organizations deploying i-PRO Co., Ltd. surveillance cameras, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized manipulation of camera settings or operations if users with access to the device's web interface are tricked into visiting malicious websites. Potential impacts include disabling security features, altering recording schedules, or changing network configurations, which could degrade physical security monitoring and incident response capabilities. Although the vulnerability does not allow direct data exfiltration or denial of service, the integrity compromise could facilitate further attacks or evade detection. Organizations in sectors with high reliance on video surveillance, such as critical infrastructure, transportation, retail, and public safety, may face increased operational risks. The requirement for user interaction somewhat limits exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments where users frequently access the device interface via web browsers.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 17:40 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats