CVE-2025-27459
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 VNC application stores its passwords encrypted within the registry but uses DES for encryption. As DES is broken, the original passwords can be recovered.
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 VNC application stores user passwords in the Windows registry using DES encryption. Since DES is a broken cryptographic algorithm with a 56-bit key size, attackers can recover the original plaintext passwords by decrypting the stored values. This allows unauthorized access to VNC sessions.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 VNC application installationCheck if the Endress Meac300 Fnade4 Fnade4 firmware or associated VNC application is installed on the system. Review installed software, system inventory, or firmware version information.Affected if If Endress Meac300 Fnade4 Fnade4 firmware or related VNC software is present on the system
-
Locate registry password storageSearch Windows registry for VNC-related password storage keys. Look in typical VNC configuration paths for entries containing encrypted credential data.Affected if If registry keys storing VNC user passwords are found on the system
-
Verify DES encryption is usedExamine the stored password values in the registry. DES-encrypted passwords typically appear as fixed-length hexadecimal strings (8 bytes/16 characters). Note the format of the encrypted values.Affected if If stored passwords use DES encryption (recognizable by fixed-length DES output format)
-
Confirm version is within affected rangeDetermine the exact firmware or software version installed. According to the CVE, all versions of Endress Meac300 Fnade4 Fnade4 firmware are affected.Affected if If the installed version is any release of Endress Meac300 Fnade4 firmware (all versions are affected)
A user is affected if they have Endress Meac300 Fnade4 firmware installed with VNC passwords stored in the Windows registry using DES encryption.
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 dataReplace DES encryption with a modern algorithm (e.g., AES-256) and re-encrypt existing stored passwords using proper key derivation (e.g., PBKDF2, bcrypt). Migrate registry storage format to accommodate the stronger encryption.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-27459 — 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-2025-27459 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