CVE-2025-47818VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2025Updated 2 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-47818: Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devices · Use of Hard-coded Password

Affects Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devicesSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.2 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.2Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Physical
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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 27 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 2026-10-26.

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
Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devices	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should prioritize upgrading Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devices to version 1.3 or later once available, as this likely addresses the hard-coded password issue. Until patches are released, organizations should implement strict network segmentation and access controls to limit local network access to these devices, ensuring only authorized personnel can connect. Physical security measures should be enhanced to prevent unauthorized physical access to the devices or their network segments. Monitoring network traffic for unusual connection attempts or unauthorized access can help detect exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations should liaise with Flock Safety for any interim firmware updates or configuration guidance. Where possible, deploying additional authentication layers or VPNs to access device management interfaces can reduce exposure. Finally, conducting regular security audits and penetration tests focusing on these devices will help identify and remediate any exploitation attempts promptly.

Description

Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devices before 1.3 have a hard-coded password for a connection.

Impact

For European organizations, especially law enforcement agencies, municipalities, or private security firms deploying Flock Safety Gunshot Detection devices, this vulnerability poses a confidentiality risk. Unauthorized access via the hard-coded password could allow attackers to intercept or gather sensitive data related to gunshot detection events or device configurations. While the impact on device functionality or data integrity is minimal, exposure of such information could compromise operational security or privacy. The low CVSS score and high attack complexity suggest that exploitation requires physical proximity or local network access, limiting remote attack feasibility. However, in urban or high-risk areas where these devices are deployed, attackers with local access could exploit this vulnerability to surveil or evade detection. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the persistence of a hard-coded password means the vulnerability remains exploitable until patched. European organizations must consider the potential for targeted attacks or insider threats leveraging this weakness, especially in sensitive security environments.

CWE-259Use of Hard-coded Password (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product contains a hard-coded password, which it uses for its own inbound authentication or for outbound communication to external components.
Architecture and Design
For outbound authentication: store passwords outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320).
Architecture and Design
For inbound authentication: Rather than hard-code a default username and password for first time logins, utilize a "first login" mode that requires the user to enter a unique strong password.
Architecture and Design
Perform access control checks and limit which entities can access the feature that requires the hard-coded password. For example, a feature might only be enabled through the system console instead of through a network connection.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.6.2 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (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 3 Sep 2025, 00:38 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-259

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats