VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6521: TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro Firmware ZJ_CG32-2201 · Weak Cryptography

Affects TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro Firmware ZJ_CG32-2201Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.6 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.6High

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

EPSS: 0.08% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 0% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
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: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 27 Jun 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro Firmware ZJ_CG32-2201	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should: 1) Avoid deploying affected firmware versions and delay device setup until a patched firmware is available. 2) If immediate deployment is necessary, perform device setup in physically secure, controlled environments to prevent wireless interception. 3) Use wired or isolated network segments for initial device configuration where possible, eliminating the risk of wireless eavesdropping. 4) Monitor network traffic for unusual access point broadcasts or unexpected device management communications during setup phases. 5) Implement strict access controls and network segmentation to limit the impact of any compromised device. 6) Engage with TrendMakers for firmware updates or patches addressing the key exchange flaw. 7) Educate IT staff and users on the risks of setting up devices in unsecured environments and the importance of verifying device authenticity. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on securing the setup environment and controlling exposure during the vulnerable phase.

Description

During the initial setup of the device the user connects to an access point broadcast by the Sight Bulb Pro. During the negotiation, AES Encryption keys are passed in cleartext. If captured, an attacker may be able to decrypt communications between the management app and the Sight Bulb Pro which may include sensitive information such as network credentials.

Impact

For European organizations deploying TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro devices, this vulnerability poses a considerable risk to network security during device onboarding. Exposure of AES keys in cleartext can allow attackers to decrypt sensitive setup communications, potentially harvesting network credentials and other confidential data. This can facilitate unauthorized access to corporate networks, lateral movement, or espionage activities. Given the increasing use of IoT and smart lighting in office and industrial environments, compromised devices could serve as entry points for attackers. The confidentiality and integrity of network credentials and device management data are at risk, which could lead to broader network compromise. The vulnerability is particularly concerning in environments where device setup occurs in shared or public spaces, increasing the likelihood of interception. While no active exploits are known, the ease of capturing wireless traffic during setup and the critical nature of the leaked information make this a high-impact threat for organizations relying on these devices in Europe.

CWE-327Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A04:2025: Cryptographic Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
When there is a need to store or transmit sensitive data, use strong, up-to-date cryptographic algorithms to encrypt that data. Select a well-vetted algorithm that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field, and use well-tested implementations.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that the design allows one cryptographic algorithm to be replaced with another in the next generation or version. Where possible, use wrappers to make the interfaces uniform. This will make it easier to upgrade to stronger algorithms.
Architecture and Design
Carefully manage and protect cryptographic keys (see CWE-320). If the keys can be guessed or stolen, then the strength of the cryptography itself is irrelevant.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cryptographic Storage (opens in a new tab)
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
Transport Layer Protection (opens in a new tab)
User Privacy Protection (opens in a new tab)
Password Storage (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.7 (opens in a new tab)
V2.9.3 (opens in a new tab)
V6.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation (opens in a new tab)
Cryptanalysis of Cellular Encryption (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 27 Jun 2025, 17:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-327

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats