CVE-2025-65823VulnerabilityPublished 10 Dec 2025Updated 11 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-65823: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.8 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.8Critical

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

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: 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: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Dec 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 2026-10-26.

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

1. Immediately audit all Meatmeet Pro devices in use and identify those with vulnerable firmware containing hardcoded credentials. 2. Enforce strict physical security controls around device deployment areas to prevent unauthorized proximity during initial setup. 3. Segment vendor Wi-Fi networks from critical internal networks to limit lateral movement if compromised. 4. Monitor wireless networks for rogue access points mimicking the hardcoded SSID and password to detect potential attacks. 5. Engage with the vendor to request firmware updates or patches that remove hardcoded credentials and implement secure provisioning mechanisms. 6. Use network access control (NAC) solutions to restrict device connections based on device identity rather than relying solely on Wi-Fi credentials. 7. Educate staff on the risks of connecting devices to untrusted networks and enforce policies to prevent unauthorized device setup. 8. Consider deploying intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to identify anomalous network behavior related to this vulnerability. 9. If possible, replace vulnerable devices with alternatives that follow secure development practices.

Description

The Meatmeet Pro was found to be shipped with hardcoded Wi-Fi credentials in the firmware, for the test network it was developed on. If an attacker retrieved this, and found the physical location of the Wi-Fi network, they could gain unauthorized access to the Wi-Fi network of the vendor. Additionally, if an attacker were located in close physical proximity to the device when it was first set up, they may be able to force the device to auto-connect to an attacker-controlled access point by setting the SSID and password to the same as which was found in the firmware file.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability can lead to unauthorized access to vendor Wi-Fi networks, potentially exposing sensitive data and internal systems to attackers. Compromise of the vendor's network could result in data breaches, intellectual property theft, disruption of services, and supply chain attacks if the vendor provides critical services or products. The ability to force the device to connect to an attacker-controlled access point increases the risk of interception and manipulation of network traffic, which can undermine trust in vendor communications and lead to further exploitation. Organizations relying on Meatmeet Pro devices or connected to vendor networks may face operational disruptions and reputational damage. The physical proximity requirement for the second attack vector means that facilities with less stringent physical security controls are at higher risk. Overall, the vulnerability threatens confidentiality, integrity, and availability of network resources and could have cascading effects on European enterprises and critical infrastructure.

Summary

CVE-2025-65823 identifies a severe security flaw in the Meatmeet Pro device firmware, where hardcoded Wi-Fi credentials intended for a test network are embedded and shipped with the device. This practice violates secure coding principles (CWE-798) and exposes the vendor's Wi-Fi network to unauthorized access if an attacker can extract these credentials from the firmware and physically locate the network. The vulnerability also allows an attacker in close physical proximity during the device's initial setup to force it to connect to a malicious access point by configuring an SSID and password identical to the hardcoded test credentials. This can lead to man-in-the-middle attacks, network infiltration, and potential lateral movement within the vendor's infrastructure. The CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8 reflects the vulnerability's network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, and its impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. No patches or fixes have been published yet, and no exploits are known in the wild, but the risk remains critical due to the ease of exploitation and potential damage. The vulnerability underscores the risks of embedding static credentials in firmware and the importance of secure device provisioning and network access controls.

CWE-798Use of Hard-coded Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product contains hard-coded credentials, such as a password or cryptographic key.
Architecture and Design
For outbound authentication: store passwords, keys, and other credentials outside of the code in a strongly-protected, encrypted configuration file or database that is protected from access by all outsiders, including other local users on the same system. Properly protect the key (CWE-320).
Architecture and Design
For inbound authentication: Rather than hard-code a default username and password, key, or other authentication credentials for first time logins, utilize a "first login" mode that requires the user to enter a unique strong password or key.
Architecture and Design
If the product must contain hard-coded credentials or they cannot be removed, perform access control checks and limit which entities can access the feature that requires the hard-coded credentials. For example, a feature might only be enabled through the system console instead of through a network connection.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Key Management (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.4 (opens in a new tab)
V6.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V3.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Read Sensitive Constants Within an Executable (opens in a new tab)
Try Common or Default Usernames and Passwords (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 17 Dec 2025, 22:11 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-798

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats