CVE-2018-10825
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedMimo Baby 2 devices do not use authentication or encryption for the Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) communication from a Turtle to a Lilypad, which allows attackers to inject fake information about the position and temperature of a baby via a replay or spoofing attack.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe Mimo Baby 2 monitoring system transmits baby position and temperature data from the Turtle sensor to the Lilypad receiver over unencrypted, unauthenticated BLE communication, allowing any nearby attacker with BLE capability to inject spoofed sensor data via replay or spoofing attacks.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device modelLocate the model number on the Mimo Baby 2 monitoring system (Turtle sensor and Lilypad receiver). Confirm it is the Mimo Baby 2 system from Mimobaby.Affected if The device is a Mimo Baby 2 monitoring system (any firmware version)
-
Verify BLE encryption statusUse a BLE sniffer or BLE analysis tool to capture BLE traffic between the Turtle sensor and Lilypad receiver. Inspect the packets to determine if encryption (e.g., LTK, STK) is present in the connection.Affected if BLE communication between Turtle sensor and Lilypad receiver is unencrypted (no encryption parameters observed in captured packets)
-
Check BLE authentication requirementsAttempt to pair a third-party BLE device with the Lilypad receiver, or examine the BLE advertising/connection parameters to see if authentication (bonding, PIN, or Secure Connections) is required before data exchange.Affected if BLE pairing is not required or authentication is disabled (open pairing or no bonding)
-
Test for replay vulnerabilityCapture a valid BLE data packet from the Turtle sensor (containing baby position or temperature data) and replay it using a BLE injection tool. Observe if the Lilypad receiver accepts the replayed data without verification.Affected if Replay of captured sensor data is accepted by the Lilypad receiver without rejection or fresh challenge-response
If the Mimo Baby 2 system uses BLE communication without encryption and authentication (all versions are affected), the environment is vulnerable to spoofed sensor data injection.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement BLE Secure Connections pairing with encryption and authentication to ensure only legitimate Turtle sensors can communicate with the Lilypad receiver; this requires firmware updates to both devices.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-10825 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-10825 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data