VulnerabilityPublished 1 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-54850: Socomec DIRIS Digiware M-70 · Missing Authentication

Affects Socomec DIRIS Digiware M-70Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% 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:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 Dec 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 26 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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, 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
Socomec DIRIS Digiware M-70	Affected =1.6.9	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-54850, European organizations should implement network-level protections such as firewall rules to restrict access to port 503 (Modbus TCP) only to trusted management networks and authorized personnel. Employ network segmentation to isolate industrial control devices from general IT networks and the internet. Monitor network traffic for unusual Modbus RTU over TCP Write Single Register requests, especially targeting registers 58112, 29440, and 57856, to detect potential exploitation attempts. Since no official patches are currently available, coordinate with Socomec for firmware updates or advisories. Consider deploying intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) with Modbus protocol awareness to block suspicious sequences. Implement strict access control policies and use VPNs or secure tunnels for remote management to reduce exposure. Regularly audit device configurations and logs to identify unauthorized changes. Finally, develop incident response plans specific to industrial control system DoS scenarios to minimize downtime and recovery time.

Description

A denial of service vulnerability exists in the Modbus TCP and Modbus RTU over TCP functionality of Socomec DIRIS Digiware M-70 1.6.9. A specially crafted series of network requests can lead to a denial of service. An attacker can send a sequence of unauthenticated packets to trigger this vulnerability.An attacker can trigger this denial-of-service condition by sending a sequence of Modbus RTU over TCP messages to port 503 using the Write Single Register function code (6). The attack sequence begins with a message to register 58112 with a value of 1000, indicating that a configuration change will follow. Next, a message is sent to register 29440 with a value corresponding to the new Modbus address to be configured. Finally, a message to register 57856 with a value of 161 commits the configuration change. After this configuration change, the device will be in a denial-of-service state.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-54850 is a denial of service condition that renders the Socomec DIRIS Digiware M-70 device unavailable. For European organizations, especially those in critical infrastructure sectors such as energy, manufacturing, and utilities, this can lead to significant operational disruptions. Loss of availability in power monitoring and management devices can cause failures in energy distribution oversight, delayed fault detection, and potential cascading effects on industrial control systems. This may result in financial losses, safety hazards, and regulatory non-compliance. Since the attack requires no authentication and can be executed remotely, the risk of exploitation by malicious actors or automated scanning tools is elevated. The lack of confidentiality and integrity impact means data leakage or manipulation is not a concern, but the operational continuity and reliability of critical infrastructure are at stake. Organizations relying on this device must consider the potential for targeted attacks or accidental disruptions caused by misconfigured network traffic.

CWE-306Missing Authentication for Critical Function (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #21OWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
Architecture and Design
Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
Architecture and Design
Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Choosing Message Identifier (opens in a new tab)
Force the System to Reset Values (opens in a new tab)
Using Unpublished Interfaces or Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
Communication Channel Manipulation (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2025-2248 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Dec 2025, 17:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-306

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats