CVE-2024-46548
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 · uneditedTP-Link Tapo P125M and Kasa KP125M v1.0.3 was discovered to improperly validate certificates, allowing attackers to eavesdrop on communications and access sensitive information via a man-in-the-middle 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 · moderate confidenceThe TP-Link Tapo P125M and Kasa KP125M smart plugs version v1.0.3 fail to properly validate SSL/TLS certificates during secure communications. This certificate validation weakness allows an attacker positioned on the same network to intercept traffic via a man-in-the-middle attack, potentially exposing sensitive credentials or device communications.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 smart plug physical device or check the Tapo/Kasa app for connected devices. Confirm the model number is either Tapo P125M or Kasa KP125M.Affected if The device model is Tapo P125M or Kasa KP125M.
-
Check the installed firmware versionOpen the Tapo or Kasa mobile app, select the device, navigate to Device Settings > Firmware Update, or check the device label/packaging. Note the exact firmware version displayed.Affected if The firmware version is v1.0.3 exactly.
-
Confirm the device uses secure communicationsVerify the device is configured to communicate over HTTPS/TLS (the default behavior for these smart plugs when connecting to TP-Link cloud services).Affected if The device communicates over any network (WiFi) to cloud services, as the certificate validation flaw is present in the default secure communication path.
-
Assess network accessibilityDetermine if the device network segment is accessible to untrusted users or if it shares network space with guest or untrusted devices.Affected if The device operates on a network where untrusted actors could potentially intercept traffic.
You are affected if you have a Tapo P125M or Kasa KP125M smart plug running firmware version v1.0.3 and it communicates over your network, since the SSL/TLS certificate validation flaw exists in this specific version.
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 dataApply vendor-provided firmware updates when available. As an interim control, isolate these devices on a dedicated network segment to limit exposure to potential MITM attackers.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-46548 — 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-2024-46548 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