CVE-2025-66357VulnerabilityPublished 16 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-66357: Inaba Denki Sangyo CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini (IB-MCT001) · Unchecked Error Condition

Affects Inaba Denki Sangyo CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini (IB-MCT001)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

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

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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 16 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Inaba Denki Sangyo Co., Ltd. CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini (IB-MCT001)	Affected *	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Since no patches are currently available, European organizations should implement specific mitigations to reduce risk. First, network segmentation should isolate CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini devices from critical network segments to limit exposure. Deploy strict firewall rules to restrict inbound and outbound traffic to only trusted sources and necessary protocols related to the device's operation. Continuous monitoring of device resource usage and network traffic can help detect abnormal behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Employ intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) with signatures or anomaly detection tailored to the device's communication patterns. Where possible, disable or restrict the Video Download feature if it is not essential to operations. Engage with the vendor for updates and patches, and plan for timely deployment once available. Additionally, maintain an inventory of all affected devices to prioritize risk assessment and response. Consider implementing fallback or redundant monitoring solutions to maintain operational continuity if devices become unavailable. Finally, educate operational staff about the vulnerability and signs of exploitation to enhance detection and response capabilities.

Description

CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini (IB-MCT001) contains an issue with improper check for unusual or exceptional conditions. When the Video Download feature is in a specific communication state, the product's resources may be consumed abnormally.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-66357 is on availability. Organizations relying on the CHOCO TEI WATCHER mini for video monitoring or IoT functions may experience service disruptions or device unavailability, which could affect operational continuity, especially in security-sensitive environments such as manufacturing, logistics, or critical infrastructure monitoring. Although confidentiality and integrity are not directly affected, the denial of service could indirectly impact security posture by disabling surveillance or monitoring capabilities. The lack of required authentication and user interaction means attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely and autonomously, increasing the risk of widespread disruption. In sectors where video monitoring devices are integrated into broader security or operational technology (OT) systems, this vulnerability could cascade, affecting dependent systems or triggering false alarms. The absence of patches necessitates interim risk management strategies to prevent exploitation. The impact is more pronounced in environments with limited device redundancy or where rapid device recovery is challenging.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 23 Dec 2025, 05:59 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats