CVE-2025-41721VulnerabilityPublished 22 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-41721: Sauter modulo 6 devices modu680-AS · Command Injection

Affects Sauter modulo 6 devices modu680-ASSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.7 Low.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: 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 22 Oct 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Sauter modulo 6 devices modu680-AS	Affected =0.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on all parameters passed to system commands, especially those involving openssl or other cryptographic utilities. 2. Restrict access to certificate management functions to only the most trusted and necessary administrative users, minimizing the attack surface. 3. Monitor and audit command execution logs and system activity for unusual or unauthorized command invocations related to certificate operations. 4. Apply vendor patches or firmware updates as soon as they become available to address this vulnerability directly. 5. Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit remote access to management interfaces of the modulo680-AS devices. 6. Use multi-factor authentication and strong credential policies to reduce the risk of privilege escalation. 7. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on command injection and input validation weaknesses in these devices. 8. Consider deploying intrusion detection systems that can detect anomalous command execution patterns. 9. Maintain an inventory of affected devices and ensure timely communication with the vendor for updates and advisories.

Description

A high privileged remote attacker can influence the parameters passed to the openssl command due to improper neutralization of special elements when adding a password protected self-signed certificate.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in industrial automation, building management, and critical infrastructure sectors using Sauter modulo 6 devices, this vulnerability poses a risk to system integrity. An attacker with high privileges could inject commands that alter cryptographic operations, potentially enabling unauthorized certificate creation or modification. This could undermine secure communications or authentication mechanisms relying on these certificates. While confidentiality and availability are not directly impacted, the integrity compromise could facilitate further attacks or unauthorized access. The low CVSS score and absence of known exploits reduce immediate risk, but organizations should not dismiss the threat given the strategic importance of these devices in European industrial and commercial environments. Exploitation could disrupt trust in device identity and secure communications, impacting operational security and compliance with regulations such as GDPR and NIS Directive. The vulnerability's requirement for high privileges limits exposure but highlights the importance of strict access controls and monitoring.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

sauter.csaf-tp.certvde.com/.well-known/csaf/white/2025/vde-2025-060.json (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Oct 2025, 08:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats