CVE-2025-49187VulnerabilityPublished 12 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-49187: SICK Field Analytics · Observable Response Discrepancy

Affects SICK Field AnalyticsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% 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 12 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
SICK AG SICK Field Analytics	Affected *	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability effectively, European organizations using SICK Field Analytics should implement the following specific measures: 1) Standardize error messages for failed login attempts to avoid disclosing whether a username exists, thereby preventing username enumeration. This may require custom configuration or application-layer controls if vendor patches are unavailable. 2) Enforce strong password policies and implement account lockout mechanisms after a defined number of failed login attempts to limit brute force attacks. 3) Deploy multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all user accounts accessing the SICK Field Analytics platform to reduce the risk of credential compromise. 4) Monitor authentication logs for unusual login patterns indicative of enumeration or brute force attempts, and integrate alerts into security information and event management (SIEM) systems. 5) Network segmentation should be applied to restrict access to the SICK Field Analytics system only to authorized personnel and trusted networks, reducing exposure to external attackers. 6) Engage with SICK AG to track patch releases and apply updates promptly once available. 7) Conduct user awareness training focusing on phishing and social engineering risks that could exploit enumerated usernames. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by addressing the specific nature of the vulnerability and the operational context of the affected product.

Description

For failed login attempts, the application returns different error messages depending on whether the login failed due to an incorrect password or a non-existing username. This allows an attacker to guess usernames until they find an existing one.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly those in manufacturing, industrial automation, and logistics sectors where SICK Field Analytics is deployed, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk. The ability to enumerate valid usernames can aid attackers in crafting targeted attacks, including brute force password attempts or spear phishing campaigns aimed at gaining unauthorized access. While the vulnerability itself does not allow direct compromise of system integrity or availability, it lowers the barrier for attackers to identify valid accounts, potentially leading to credential-based intrusions. This is especially critical in industrial environments where unauthorized access could lead to operational disruptions or safety hazards. Additionally, organizations subject to strict data protection regulations such as GDPR must consider the confidentiality impact, as exposure of user account information could be deemed a data breach. The lack of patches increases the window of exposure, and the medium CVSS score reflects the need for timely mitigation to prevent escalation. The threat is more pronounced in environments where multi-factor authentication (MFA) is not enforced or where password policies are weak, as attackers can leverage enumerated usernames to attempt password guessing attacks.

CWE-204Observable Response Discrepancy (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product provides different responses to incoming requests in a way that reveals internal state information to an unauthorized actor outside of the intended control sphere.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation
Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
ICMP IP Total Length Field Probe (opens in a new tab)
ICMP IP 'ID' Field Error Message Probe (opens in a new tab)
Application Fingerprinting (opens in a new tab)
System Footprinting (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 12 Jun 2025, 13:53 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-204

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats