CVE-2025-51540VulnerabilityPublished 19 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-51540: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 3.5.72.27183 : update affected systems when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.5.72.27183

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 19 Aug 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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade EzGED3 installations to version 3.5.72.27183 or later, where the vendor has addressed the insecure password hashing. Until the upgrade is applied, organizations should enforce strong password policies to reduce the risk of password cracking. Additionally, implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) can mitigate the impact of compromised passwords. Organizations should audit their user databases for password hash exposure and monitor for suspicious login activities. If hashes are suspected to be leaked, a forced password reset should be conducted. From a development perspective, organizations should advocate for or verify the use of modern, slow, and salted password hashing algorithms such as Argon2, bcrypt, or PBKDF2 in future software versions. Network segmentation and strict access controls around user credential storage systems can further reduce the risk of hash theft.

Description

EzGED3 3.5.0 stores user passwords using an insecure hashing scheme: md5(md5(password)). This hashing method is cryptographically weak and allows attackers to perform efficient offline brute-force attacks if password hashes are disclosed. The lack of salting and use of a fast, outdated algorithm makes it feasible to recover plaintext credentials using precomputed tables or GPU-based cracking tools. The vendor states that the issue is fixed in 3.5.72.27183.

Impact

For European organizations using EzGED3 3.5.0, this vulnerability poses a substantial risk to user credential confidentiality. Compromised password hashes could lead to unauthorized access to user accounts, potentially escalating to broader system compromise depending on the privileges of affected accounts. Given the ease of offline brute-force attacks against MD5 hashes, attackers can quickly recover passwords, especially if users employ weak or common passwords. This could result in data breaches, loss of sensitive information, and reputational damage. Furthermore, if the same passwords are reused across multiple systems, the impact could extend beyond EzGED3, affecting other organizational assets. The vulnerability undermines compliance with European data protection regulations such as GDPR, which mandates adequate protection of personal data, including authentication credentials.

Summary

CVE-2025-51540 identifies a cryptographic weakness in the EzGED3 software version 3.5.0, where user passwords are stored using an insecure hashing scheme: md5(md5(password)). This double application of MD5 hashing is fundamentally flawed because MD5 is a deprecated cryptographic hash function known for its vulnerabilities to collision attacks and rapid computation speed, which facilitates brute-force and dictionary attacks. Additionally, the absence of salting—random data added to passwords before hashing—exacerbates the risk by allowing attackers to leverage precomputed hash tables (rainbow tables) and GPU-accelerated cracking tools to efficiently recover plaintext passwords from stolen hash databases. The vulnerability does not require user interaction or authentication to exploit once password hashes are obtained, which could occur through other means such as database breaches or insider threats. The vendor has acknowledged the issue and released a fix in version 3.5.72.27183, presumably implementing a more secure password hashing mechanism. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild, but the weakness presents a significant risk if password hashes are leaked.

CWE-260Password in Configuration File (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A02:2025: Security Misconfiguration (opens in a new tab)
The product stores a password in a configuration file that might be accessible to actors who do not know the password.
Architecture and Design
Avoid storing passwords in easily accessible locations.
Architecture and Design
Consider storing cryptographic hashes of passwords as an alternative to storing in plaintext.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

ballpoint.fr/en/blog/ezged3-preauth-file-read-admin-takeover (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Aug 2025, 16:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-260

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats