CVE-2025-65128VulnerabilityPublished 11 Feb 2026Updated 17 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-65128: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.1 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.1High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 20% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: 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: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Feb 2026
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 2026-10-26.

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 CVE-2025-65128, organizations should implement strict network segmentation to limit access to router management interfaces only to trusted devices and users. Disable or restrict access to the web management API from all but essential internal hosts. Employ network access control (NAC) solutions to prevent unauthorized devices from connecting to the local network. Monitor network traffic for unusual API calls or configuration changes. Change default router credentials and consider replacing affected devices with models from vendors with robust security track records if immediate patching is not possible. If possible, isolate IoT and network infrastructure devices on separate VLANs with limited access. Regularly audit router configurations and logs for unauthorized changes. Engage with Shenzhen Zhibotong Electronics for firmware updates or patches and apply them promptly once available. Consider deploying endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools to detect lateral movement attempts stemming from compromised routers.

Description

A missing authentication mechanism in the web management API components of Shenzhen Zhibotong Electronics ZBT WE2001 23.09.27 allows unauthenticated attackers on the local network to modify router and network configurations. By invoking operations whose names end with "*_nocommit" and supplying the parameters expected by the invoked function, an attacker can change configuration data, including SSID, Wi-Fi credentials, and administrative passwords, without authentication or an existing session.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2025-65128 is substantial for organizations using Shenzhen Zhibotong ZBT WE2001 routers. Successful exploitation allows attackers to fully control router configurations, including Wi-Fi credentials and administrative passwords, effectively granting them persistent unauthorized access to the network. This can lead to interception of sensitive data, network traffic manipulation, and further compromise of internal systems. The lack of authentication means any local network user or compromised device can exploit this vulnerability, increasing insider threat risks. Organizations with weak network segmentation or guest network isolation are particularly vulnerable. The compromise of router credentials can also facilitate lateral movement and persistence for advanced attackers. Although the attack requires local network access, many enterprise, SMB, and home environments have insufficient controls to prevent unauthorized local access. The absence of patches increases exposure duration, elevating risk until remediation is available.

CWE-287Improper Authentication (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an authentication framework or library such as the OWASP ESAPI Authentication feature.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
V9.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fake the Source of Data (opens in a new tab)
Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Obtain Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
Session Hijacking (opens in a new tab)
Token Impersonation (opens in a new tab)
Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server (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 19 Feb 2026, 12:52 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-287

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats