VulnerabilityPublished 21 May 2025Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-48417: eCharge Hardy Barth cPH2 / cPP2 charging stations · Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key

Affects eCharge Hardy Barth cPH2 / cPP2 charging stationsSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 00:19 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CISA-ADP	CVSS 3.1	6.5

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: 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 21 May 2025
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
eCharge Hardy Barth cPH2 / cPP2 charging stations	Affected <=2.2.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Since the vulnerability stems from hard-coded keys in firmware with no option for custom certificates, mitigation requires a firmware update from the vendor that replaces the hard-coded keys with unique, configurable certificates. Until such a fix is provided, users should restrict network access to the admin interface to trusted networks only and monitor for suspicious activity.

Description

CVE-2025-48417 is a vulnerability in eCharge Hardy Barth cPH2 and cPP2 charging stations where the TLS certificate and private key used for securing the web admin interface are hard-coded in the firmware and included in update files. This allows an attacker to use the private key to perform man-in-the-middle attacks against users accessing the admin interface over HTTPS. There is no capability to upload or configure custom TLS certificates, increasing the risk of interception.

Impact

An attacker with network access can exploit the hard-coded private key to intercept and manipulate traffic to the charging station's web admin interface, compromising confidentiality and integrity of administrative communications. This could lead to unauthorized access or control over the device's management functions. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 6.5 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, no user interaction, and impacts to confidentiality and integrity but not availability.

Summary

The vulnerability arises from the use of a hard-coded cryptographic key (CWE-321) embedded in the firmware of eCharge Hardy Barth cPH2 and cPP2 charging stations. The TLS certificate and private key files (e.g., salia.local.crt, salia.local.key, salia.local.pem) are located in /etc/ssl and shipped with firmware updates. Because these keys are static and publicly accessible, an attacker can intercept and decrypt TLS traffic to the web admin interface on TCP port 443, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks. No option exists to replace or customize these certificates, making mitigation difficult without firmware changes.

CWE-321Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a hard-coded, unchangeable cryptographic key.
Architecture and Design
Prevention schemes mirror that of hard-coded password storage.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
HSTS (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 30 Oct 2026, 00:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-321

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats