VulnerabilityPublished 2 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-59406: Cleartext Transmission

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.2 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.2Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 6% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 2 Oct 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 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

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should first verify if they are using the affected version (6.21.11) of the Flock Safety Pisco Android application on their devices. Immediate steps include: 1) Requesting or applying an updated version of the application from the vendor that removes the embedded client secret and implements secure secret management practices, such as using backend token exchange mechanisms or secure vaults rather than embedding secrets in client code. 2) Rotating the compromised Auth0 client secret immediately to invalidate any extracted credentials and prevent unauthorized use. 3) Implementing network-level controls to restrict access to backend APIs only to trusted devices and IP addresses, adding an additional layer of defense. 4) Monitoring authentication logs for suspicious OAuth client activity that could indicate misuse of the leaked secret. 5) Employing runtime application self-protection (RASP) or application shielding techniques to make reverse engineering more difficult. 6) Conducting regular security audits and penetration tests focused on device firmware and application binaries to detect similar issues proactively. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on secret rotation, vendor coordination, and layered defense tailored to the affected device ecosystem.

Description

The Flock Safety Pisco com.flocksafety.android.pisco application 6.21.11 for Android (installed on Falcon and Sparrow License Plate Readers and Bravo Edge AI Compute Devices) has a cleartext Auth0 client secret in its codebase. Because application binaries can be trivially decompiled or inspected, attackers can recover this OAuth secret without special privileges. This secret is intended to remain confidential and should never be embedded directly in client-side software.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly those involved in law enforcement, private security, urban surveillance, or smart city initiatives that utilize Flock Safety’s license plate readers and AI compute devices, this vulnerability poses a substantial risk. Unauthorized access enabled by the leaked Auth0 client secret could allow attackers to bypass authentication controls, potentially gaining access to sensitive vehicle tracking data, surveillance footage, or control over device functionality. This could lead to privacy violations, data breaches involving personally identifiable information (PII), and disruption of security operations. Moreover, compromised devices could be used as pivot points for lateral movement within organizational networks, increasing the risk of broader cyberattacks. Given the increasing regulatory scrutiny in Europe around data protection (e.g., GDPR), any breach involving surveillance data could result in significant legal and financial consequences. The impact is amplified in environments where these devices are integrated into critical infrastructure or public safety systems, where availability and integrity are paramount.

CWE-319Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product transmits sensitive or security-critical data in cleartext in a communication channel that can be sniffed by unauthorized actors.
Architecture and Design
Before transmitting, encrypt the data using reliable, confidentiality-protecting cryptographic protocols.
Implementation
When using web applications with SSL, use SSL for the entire session from login to logout, not just for the initial login page.
Implementation
When designing hardware platforms, ensure that approved encryption algorithms (such as those recommended by NIST) protect paths from security critical data to trusted user applications.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
TLS Cipher String (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V1.9.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Session Sidejacking (opens in a new tab)
Harvesting Information via API Event Monitoring (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Mixing Signed and Unsigned Content (opens in a new tab)
Sniff Application Code (opens in a new tab)
Interception (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 2 Oct 2025, 17:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-319

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats