VulnerabilityPublished 9 Jun 2025Updated 9 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-5873: eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC · Unrestricted Upload

Affects eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCCSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

Base metrics

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

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to 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.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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
eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC	Affected 2.3.0 – 2.3.81 <=2.3.81 82 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Immediately audit and inventory all eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC devices in your environment to identify affected versions.
Restrict network access to the Web UI interface (/firmware.php), ideally isolating devices in segmented networks with strict firewall rules allowing only trusted management hosts.
Implement strong access controls and monitoring on management interfaces to detect anomalous file upload attempts or unusual traffic patterns.
Employ intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) with signatures or heuristics to flag exploitation attempts targeting the 'media' parameter.
Where possible, disable or restrict file upload functionality if not required for normal operations.
Regularly monitor vendor communications for patches or updates; apply them promptly once available.
Consider deploying application-layer gateways or web application firewalls (WAF) to filter and validate incoming requests to the Web UI.
Conduct penetration testing and vulnerability assessments focused on device management interfaces to identify similar weaknesses.
Maintain robust incident response plans tailored to embedded device compromise scenarios.
Engage with the vendor or community to push for a timely patch or workaround, given the vendor's current non-responsiveness.

Description

A vulnerability was detected in eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC up to 2.3.81. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /firmware.php of the component Web UI. Performing a manipulation of the argument media results in unrestricted upload. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in sectors relying on eCharge Hardy Barth Salia PLCC devices such as energy, manufacturing, or critical infrastructure, this vulnerability poses a tangible risk. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to upload malicious firmware or web shells, leading to unauthorized device control, data exfiltration, or operational disruption. This could impact the confidentiality of sensitive operational data, the integrity of device firmware and configurations, and the availability of critical services. Given the remote and unauthenticated nature of the exploit, attackers can target exposed devices over the network without needing insider access or user interaction. The lack of vendor response and patch increases the window of exposure, potentially inviting targeted attacks or opportunistic exploitation. Organizations may face regulatory and compliance risks if such devices are compromised, especially under GDPR and NIS Directive requirements. The medium severity rating suggests the impact is significant but not catastrophic; however, the broad version range affected and public exploit availability elevate the urgency for mitigation. Disruption or compromise of these devices could have cascading effects on operational technology environments and supply chains within Europe.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Jan 2026, 10:35 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats