VulnerabilityPublished 6 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-61197: Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.9 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 16:39 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.9High

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: 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: 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 impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
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 impacted component 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 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 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

AI-suggested

Immediately audit all Orban Optimod devices to identify affected versions and assess exposure of web management interfaces.
Restrict access to device management interfaces to trusted internal networks using network segmentation and firewall rules.
Disable or limit client-side storage of sensitive information by configuring the application or applying custom security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy, HttpOnly cookies) if possible.
Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual privilege escalation attempts or unauthorized access patterns.
Engage with Orban support to obtain patches or firmware updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available.
Implement multi-factor authentication and strong access controls on management interfaces to reduce risk.
Conduct user training to raise awareness about the risks of client-side data manipulation.
Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) to detect and block exploitation attempts targeting client-side storage manipulation.
Regularly review and update security policies related to device management and remote access.
Prepare incident response plans specifically addressing potential compromise of broadcast equipment.

Description

An issue in Orban Optimod 5950, Optimod 5950HD, Optimod 5750, Optimod 5750HD, Optimod Trio Optimod version 1.0.0.33 - System version 2.5.26 allows a remote attacker to escalate privileges via the application stores user privilege/role information in client-side browser storage

Impact

For European organizations, especially broadcasters and media companies relying on Orban Optimod devices, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized access to critical audio processing equipment. Attackers exploiting this flaw could disrupt broadcast operations, alter audio outputs, or gain footholds within internal networks, potentially leading to broader compromise. The confidentiality of operational data and integrity of broadcast content could be compromised, impacting brand reputation and regulatory compliance. Availability may also be affected if attackers cause device malfunctions or service interruptions. Given the strategic importance of media infrastructure in Europe, such disruptions could have cascading effects on information dissemination and emergency communications. Organizations with remote management interfaces exposed to the internet or insufficiently segmented networks are at higher risk. The vulnerability's exploitation does not require user interaction or authentication, increasing the likelihood of successful attacks if devices are accessible. Overall, the impact on European entities could be significant, particularly in countries with advanced broadcast sectors and high adoption of Orban products.

CWE-602Client-Side Enforcement of Server-Side Security (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product is composed of a server that relies on the client to implement a mechanism that is intended to protect the server.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side. 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 entirely.
Architecture and Design
If some degree of trust is required between the two entities, then use integrity checking and strong authentication to ensure that the inputs are coming from a trusted source.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Manipulating Hidden Fields (opens in a new tab)
Create Malicious Client (opens in a new tab)
Removing Important Client Functionality (opens in a new tab)
Removing/short-circuiting 'Purse' logic: removing/mutating 'cash' decrements (opens in a new tab)
Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies (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 6 Oct 2025, 14:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-602

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats