VulnerabilityPublished 10 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-41711: Janitza UMG 96RM-E 24V(5222063) · Weak Cryptography

Affects Janitza UMG 96RM-E 24V(5222063)Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% 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:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: 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 10 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
JanitzaUMG 96RM-E 24V(5222063)	Affected <=3.13	Fixed in–
JanitzaUMG 96RM-E 230V(5222062)	Affected <=3.13	Fixed in–
WeidmuellerENERGY METER 750-230 (2540910000)	Affected <=3.13	Fixed in–
WeidmuellerENERGY METER 750-24 (2540900000)	Affected <=3.13	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Limit network exposure of Janitza UMG 96RM-E devices by placing them behind firewalls and restricting access to trusted management networks only.
Monitor network traffic and device logs for unusual access attempts or brute force activities targeting device management interfaces.
Employ strong, unique passwords for all accounts on the device and change default credentials immediately.
Regularly check for firmware updates or security advisories from Janitza and apply patches promptly once available.
If firmware images are obtained for legitimate purposes, verify their integrity and avoid distribution to unauthorized parties to reduce risk of hash extraction.
Implement network segmentation to isolate critical infrastructure devices and limit lateral movement in case of credential compromise.
Consider deploying intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) tuned to detect anomalous behavior related to these devices.
Conduct periodic security assessments and penetration tests focusing on industrial control systems and energy management devices to identify and remediate weaknesses proactively.

Description

An unauthenticated remote attacker can use firmware images to extract password hashes and brute force plaintext passwords of accounts with limited access.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-41711 is the potential compromise of account credentials on Janitza UMG 96RM-E devices. Successful brute forcing of extracted password hashes can lead to unauthorized access to device management interfaces, even if only for accounts with limited privileges. This could enable attackers to gather sensitive operational data, modify configurations, or use the device as a foothold for further network intrusion. While the vulnerability does not directly affect device integrity or availability, compromised credentials can facilitate lateral movement within industrial or energy management networks, potentially leading to more severe attacks. Organizations relying on these devices in critical infrastructure sectors face increased risk of espionage, data leakage, or disruption through indirect means. The ease of exploitation (no authentication or user interaction needed) combined with the widespread use of Janitza products in energy and industrial markets amplifies the threat. However, the absence of known exploits in the wild and the medium CVSS score suggest the threat is moderate but should not be underestimated.

CWE-327Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms.
Architecture and Design
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Mar 2026, 08:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-327

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats