VulnerabilityPublished 6 Oct 2025Updated 26 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-59448: YoSmart YoLink ecosystem · Cleartext Transmission

Affects YoSmart YoLink ecosystemSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.7 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.7Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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: 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 on 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 6 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
YoSmart YoLink ecosystem	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize migrating away from the legacy YoLink Mobile Application 1.40.41 and the unencrypted MQTT Broker to updated versions that implement secure communication protocols such as MQTT over TLS. Network segmentation should be enforced to isolate IoT device communication from general enterprise traffic, reducing the risk of traffic interception. Deploying VPNs or secure tunnels for remote access to IoT devices can further protect MQTT traffic. Monitoring network traffic for unusual MQTT activity or unauthorized command injection attempts can help detect exploitation attempts. Organizations should engage with the vendor to obtain updates or patches and verify that new releases address the encryption deficiency. Additionally, implementing strong authentication mechanisms for MQTT brokers and enforcing strict access controls will limit unauthorized access. Regular security assessments of IoT ecosystems and employee awareness training on IoT security best practices are recommended to reduce exposure.

Description

Components of the YoSmart YoLink ecosystem through 2025-10-02 leverage unencrypted MQTT to communicate over the internet. An attacker with the ability to monitor network traffic could therefore obtain sensitive information or tamper with the traffic to control affected devices. This affects YoLink Hub 0382, YoLink Mobile Application 1.40.41, and YoLink MQTT Broker. NOTE: The vendor states that the vulnerability described (related to insecure transmission) only impacts the legacy mobile application logic, not the Hub hardware or firmware. The Hub functions solely as a pass-through (transparent gateway) for LoRa wireless data and does not inspect or process the application layer data.

Impact

For European organizations using the YoSmart YoLink ecosystem, particularly those relying on the legacy mobile application or MQTT Broker for device management, this vulnerability poses a risk of sensitive data exposure and unauthorized device control. Attackers able to monitor network traffic—such as those on the same local network or with access to ISP-level traffic—could intercept credentials, device commands, or telemetry data. This could lead to privacy breaches, unauthorized manipulation of IoT devices, and potential disruption of business processes dependent on these devices. While the Hub hardware is not directly vulnerable, the ecosystem’s overall security posture is weakened. Sectors with critical IoT deployments, including smart buildings, industrial automation, and healthcare, could face operational risks. The medium CVSS score reflects moderate impact, but the potential for lateral movement or escalation in complex environments cannot be discounted. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers often target IoT ecosystems with weak encryption.

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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 2 Dec 2025, 18:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-319

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats