VulnerabilityPublished 9 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-67070: Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.2 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.2High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 30% 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:L/A:N

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

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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 9 Jan 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 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

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately inventory all Intelbras CFTV IP NVD 9032 R devices and assess their network exposure. Until a vendor patch is available, restrict network access to the management interfaces of these devices using firewall rules and network segmentation, limiting access to trusted administrators only. Disable remote password recovery features if possible or implement compensating controls such as VPN access for management. Monitor logs and network traffic for unusual password reset attempts or unauthorized administrative access. Implement strong network monitoring and alerting to detect exploitation attempts. Engage with Intelbras support to obtain firmware updates or security advisories. Additionally, consider deploying intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to identify exploitation attempts. Educate staff on the risks and ensure physical security of devices to prevent local exploitation. Finally, plan for rapid patch deployment once a fix is released.

Description

A vulnerability exists in Intelbras CFTV IP NVD 9032 R Ftd V2.800.00IB00C.0.T, which allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass the multi-factor authentication (MFA) mechanism during the password recovery process. This results in the ability to change the admin password and gain full access to the administrative panel.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability is significant. Surveillance systems are critical for physical security, and compromise of these devices can lead to unauthorized monitoring, privacy violations, and potential manipulation or disabling of security cameras. This undermines both physical and cybersecurity postures. Attackers gaining administrative access can alter configurations, disable alerts, or use the device as a foothold for lateral movement within the network. Sensitive environments such as government buildings, critical infrastructure, and corporate offices are particularly at risk. The breach of confidentiality and integrity of video data can also lead to regulatory and compliance issues under GDPR and other privacy laws. The availability of the surveillance system may be disrupted if attackers disable or misconfigure the device. Given the lack of authentication and ease of exploitation, the threat is elevated for any organization with exposed or poorly segmented Intelbras surveillance devices.

CWE-288Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product requires authentication, but the product has an alternate path or channel that does not require authentication.
Architecture and Design
Funnel all access through a single choke point to simplify how users can access a resource. For every access, perform a check to determine if the user has permissions to access the resource.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V1.2.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/teteco/intelbras-cftv-admin-bypass (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Jan 2026, 18:50 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-288

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats