VulnerabilityPublished 17 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-64342: espressif esp-idf · Unchecked Error Condition

Affects espressif esp-idfSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 5.1.7 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.1.7

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Nov 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

Upgrade espressif/esp-idf to 5.1.7.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubespressif/esp-idf`pkg:github/espressif/esp-idf`Other threats	Affected <5.1.7	Fixed in 5.1.7

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, network-level controls should be implemented to monitor and filter anomalous BLE traffic, specifically connection requests with invalid Access Addresses (0x00000000 or 0xFFFFFFFF). Deploy BLE intrusion detection systems capable of identifying malformed connection attempts. Device firmware should be audited to ensure robust error handling for exceptional BLE conditions. Organizations should also review application logic that relies on connection events to validate connection state independently, preventing false assumptions. For critical deployments, consider segmenting BLE networks and limiting physical access to reduce attack surface. Finally, incorporate this vulnerability into incident response plans to quickly detect and respond to potential exploitation attempts.

Description

ESF-IDF is the Espressif Internet of Things (IOT) Development Framework. When the ESP32 is in advertising mode, if it receives a connection request containing an invalid Access Address (AA) of 0x00000000 or 0xFFFFFFFF, advertising may stop unexpectedly. In this case, the controller may incorrectly report a connection event to the host, which can cause the application layer to assume that the device has successfully established a connection. This issue has been fixed in versions 5.5.2, 5.4.3, 5.3.5, 5.2.6, and 5.1.7. At time of publication versions 5.5.2, 5.3.5, and 5.1.7 have not been released but are fixed respectively in commits 3b95b50, e3d7042, and 75967b5.

Impact

For European organizations deploying ESP32-based IoT devices using esp-idf, this vulnerability could lead to unexpected device behavior, including denial of service through halted advertising and incorrect connection state reporting. This may disrupt IoT operations, device management, and data collection processes, particularly in industrial, smart city, healthcare, and logistics applications where ESP32 devices are prevalent. Misleading connection status could cause application logic errors, potentially affecting system reliability and security monitoring. Although no known exploits exist, attackers within wireless range could exploit this flaw to degrade service or confuse device state, impacting operational continuity. The impact is more pronounced in environments with dense IoT deployments relying on BLE connectivity for critical functions. Additionally, the flaw could be leveraged as part of a broader attack chain targeting IoT infrastructure, increasing risk exposure for European enterprises and public sector entities using Espressif hardware.

CWE-754Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product does not check or incorrectly checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that are not expected to occur frequently during day to day operation of the product.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is expected.
Implementation
If using exception handling, catch and throw specific exceptions instead of overly-general exceptions (CWE-396, CWE-397). Catch and handle exceptions as locally as possible so that exceptions do not propagate too far up the call stack (CWE-705). Avoid unchecked or uncaught exceptions where feasible (CWE-248).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (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 24 Nov 2025, 18:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-754

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats