CVE-2025-52548VulnerabilityPublished 2 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-52548: Copeland LP E3 Supervisory Control · CWE-1242

Affects Copeland LP E3 Supervisory ControlSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 29% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Sep 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
Copeland LP E3 Supervisory Control	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Restrict administrative access to the E3 Supervisory Control application services strictly to trusted personnel and systems, employing strong authentication and access controls. 2. Monitor and audit administrative actions within the application services to detect any attempts to invoke the hidden API or enable SSH/Shellinabox services. 3. Implement network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access to the supervisory control systems and prevent unauthorized remote connections to the underlying OS. 4. Apply the latest firmware updates from Copeland LP as soon as they become available, specifically versions 2.31F01 or later that address this vulnerability. 5. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on industrial control systems to identify potential privilege escalations or hidden functionalities. 6. Employ host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS) on supervisory control systems to detect unusual service activations or remote access attempts. 7. Educate administrators and operators about the risks of enabling undocumented or hidden services and enforce policies against unauthorized configuration changes.

Description

E3 Site Supervisor Control (firmware version < 2.31F01) contains a hidden API call in the application services that enables SSH and Shellinabox, which exist but are disabled by default. An attacker with admin access to the application services can utilize this API to enable remote access to the underlying OS.

Impact

For European organizations using Copeland LP's E3 Supervisory Control systems, this vulnerability presents a significant risk primarily in industrial control environments where these supervisory control systems are deployed. The ability to enable remote OS access via SSH or Shellinabox could allow attackers with administrative access to bypass existing network segmentation or monitoring controls, potentially leading to unauthorized system modifications, disruption of industrial processes, or data theft. Given the critical nature of supervisory control systems in sectors such as manufacturing, energy, and utilities, exploitation could lead to operational disruptions or safety incidents. The requirement for administrative access reduces the likelihood of remote exploitation by external attackers but raises concerns about insider threats or lateral movement within compromised networks. European organizations with stringent regulatory requirements around industrial cybersecurity (e.g., NIS Directive, GDPR for data protection) could face compliance and reputational risks if this vulnerability is exploited. The lack of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits once the vulnerability becomes widely known.

CWE-1242Inclusion of Undocumented Features or Chicken Bits (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The device includes chicken bits or undocumented features that can create entry points for unauthorized actors.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
The implementation of chicken bits in a released product is highly discouraged. If implemented at all, ensure that they are disabled in production devices. All interfaces to a device should be documented.
Attack patterns
Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Functionality Misuse (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

armis.com/research/frostbyte10/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 2 Sep 2025, 11:49 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1242

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats