CVE-2025-6522VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6522: TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro Firmware ZJ_CG32-2201 · Command Injection

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

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% 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:U/C:L/I:H/A:L

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: High
Availability: Low

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: 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: 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: 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 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 2026-10-25.

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

AI-suggested

1. Network Segmentation: Isolate Sight Bulb Pro devices on dedicated VLANs or network segments with strict access controls to prevent unauthorized adjacent network access. 2. Firewall Rules: Block inbound traffic to port 16668 from untrusted or unnecessary network segments to reduce exposure. 3. Network Monitoring: Deploy IDS/IPS solutions to detect anomalous JSON payloads or unusual traffic patterns targeting port 16668. 4. Device Hardening: Disable or restrict the proprietary TCP protocol if possible, or configure the device to require authentication for command execution. 5. Vendor Engagement: Engage with TrendMakers for firmware updates or patches addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. 6. Incident Response Preparation: Develop and test response plans for potential device compromise, including device isolation and forensic analysis. 7. User Awareness: Educate network administrators about the risk of adjacent network attacks and the importance of network segmentation for IoT devices. These measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on network architectural controls and proactive monitoring tailored to the specific protocol and device behavior.

Description

Unauthenticated users on an adjacent network with the Sight Bulb Pro can run shell commands as root through a vulnerable proprietary TCP protocol available on Port 16668. This vulnerability allows an attacker to run arbitrary commands on the Sight Bulb Pro by passing a well formed JSON string.

Impact

For European organizations deploying the TrendMakers Sight Bulb Pro, this vulnerability presents a significant risk to operational security and device integrity. Compromise of these devices could allow attackers to pivot within internal networks, especially in environments where these bulbs are integrated into building management or industrial control systems. The ability to execute arbitrary commands as root could lead to data tampering, unauthorized surveillance, or disruption of lighting infrastructure. Although the attack requires adjacency, many corporate and industrial networks have segments where such devices reside alongside critical systems, increasing the risk of lateral movement. Confidentiality impact is limited but not negligible, as attackers could potentially exfiltrate sensitive configuration or network information. The lack of available patches or mitigations at present means organizations must proactively isolate these devices and monitor network traffic. Given the medium CVSS score, the threat is moderate but should not be underestimated in environments with high security requirements or critical infrastructure.

CWE-77Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #23OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.
Architecture and Design
If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
Implementation
If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
LDAP Injection (opens in a new tab)
Command Delimiters (opens in a new tab)
IMAP/SMTP Command Injection (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Writeable Terminal Devices (opens in a new tab)
Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers (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, 17:39 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-77

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats