CVE-2025-27449
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 · uneditedThe MEAC300-FNADE4 does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame, making it susceptible to brute-force attacks.
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 MEAC300-FNADE4 lacks rate limiting, account lockout thresholds, or other brute-force countermeasures on its authentication interface. An attacker can systematically attempt password combinations until gaining access, which the high CVSS score of 9.8 reflects as easily exploitable and with severe impact.
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 data<= 0.16.0CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 firmware versionAccess the device administrative interface or check system information to retrieve the installed MEAC300-FNADE4 firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is 0.16.0 or lower
-
Verify rate-limiting configuration on authentication endpointsInspect the authentication or security configuration settings for any rate-limiting controls on login or authentication endpointsAffected if Rate-limiting is not present or disabled on authentication endpoints
-
Check for account lockout policiesReview the user account or security policy settings to determine if account lockout after failed login attempts is configuredAffected if No account lockout mechanism or failed attempt threshold is defined in the authentication settings
-
Examine authentication logs for brute-force protectionReview authentication event logs to see if the system records and blocks or limits repeated failed login attempts from the same sourceAffected if Logs show no evidence of failed attempt tracking, temporary blocks, or IP-based restrictions after multiple authentication failures
The environment is affected if the device runs firmware version 0.16.0 or lower AND lacks both rate-limiting on authentication endpoints and account lockout mechanisms for failed login attempts.
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 authentication rate limiting and account lockout policies (e.g., lock after 3-5 failed attempts for 15-30 minutes). Consider adding CAPTCHA or multi-factor authentication to further mitigate automated attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-27449 — 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-2025-27449 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