CVE-2025-35451
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 · uneditedPTZOptics and possibly other ValueHD-based pan-tilt-zoom cameras use hard-coded, default administrative credentials. The passwords can readily be cracked. Many cameras have SSH or telnet listening on all interfaces. The passwords cannot be changed by the user, nor can the SSH or telnet service be disabled by the user.
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 confidenceHard-coded default administrative credentials in PTZOptics and ValueHD-based PTZ cameras that cannot be changed by users, with SSH/telnet services exposed on all interfaces that also cannot be disabled, allowing trivial remote authentication bypass.
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<= 6.3.34<= 6.3.34<= 6.2.81<= 6.3.20<= 6.3.20<= 6.2.73<= 6.3.30<= 6.3.30CVSS 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 camera modelAccess the camera's web interface or check the device label/metadata to confirm it is a PTZOptics PT12X, PT20X, or PT30X model (SDI, NDI, or USB variants).Affected if The device is one of the listed PTZOptics models (PT12x, PT20x, PT30x in SDI, NDI, or USB variants).
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the camera's web interface or use SNMP to retrieve the firmware version. Compare it against the affected version thresholds: PT12x SDI/NDI <= 6.3.34, PT12x USB <= 6.2.81, PT20x SDI/NDI <= 6.3.20, PT20x USB <= 6.2.73, PT30x SDI/NDI <= 6.3.30.Affected if The firmware version is at or below the listed threshold for your specific model.
-
Verify SSH or telnet accessibilityAttempt to connect to the device on ports 22 (SSH) and 23 (telnet) from a network scanner or using nc/telnet/nmap. Check if these services are listening on all interfaces (not just localhost).Affected if SSH (port 22) or telnet (port 23) is open and reachable on the device's network interfaces.
-
Confirm default credential accessUsing the device's web interface, HTTP API, or SSH/telnet login, attempt authentication using the factory default administrative credentials documented for the device.Affected if The default admin credentials grant access to the device, indicating they have not been changed and cannot be changed by the user.
You are affected if you have a PTZOptics PT12x/PT20x/PT30x camera running firmware at or below the version threshold for your model, with SSH or telnet exposed, where default credentials still work and cannot be changed.
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 dataIsolate affected cameras behind firewalls or restrict network access since credentials cannot be changed and services cannot be disabled; consider replacement with cameras supporting credential management.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-35451 — 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-2025-35451 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