CVE-2025-40817
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been identified in LOGO! 12/24RCE (6ED1052-1MD08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 12/24RCEo (6ED1052-2MD08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 230RCE (6ED1052-1FB08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 230RCEo (6ED1052-2FB08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 24CE (6ED1052-1CC08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 24CEo (6ED1052-2CC08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 24RCE (6ED1052-1HB08-0BA2) (All versions), LOGO! 24RCEo (6ED1052-2HB08-0BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 12/24RCE (6AG1052-1MD08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 12/24RCEo (6AG1052-2MD08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 230RCE (6AG1052-1FB08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 230RCEo (6AG1052-2FB08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 24CE (6AG1052-1CC08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 24CEo (6AG1052-2CC08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 24RCE (6AG1052-1HB08-7BA2) (All versions), SIPLUS LOGO! 24RCEo (6AG1052-2HB08-7BA2) (All versions). Affected devices do not conduct certain validations when interacting with them. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to change time of the device, which means the device could behave differently.
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 vulnerability allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to change the system time on affected Siemens LOGO! PLC devices by sending specially crafted requests without proper validation. Since LOGO! devices rely on time-based logic for control operations, manipulating the device clock could cause the PLC to execute logic at incorrect times, potentially leading to unexpected industrial process behavior.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/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 Siemens LOGO! PLC deviceLocate and confirm the device model by accessing the PLC directly via the LOGO! Comfort software, checking the device label, or querying the device's web interface if available. Confirm it is a Siemens LOGO! series PLC.Affected if The target device is a Siemens LOGO! PLC (any model in the LOGO! 0BA7, 0BA8, or newer series).
-
Determine device firmware versionConnect to the LOGO! device via LOGO! Comfort software and navigate to the device information section, or access the web interface and check the firmware/software version displayed. Record this version number.Affected if The installed firmware version falls within the affected version range published by Siemens for this CVE (if known); otherwise, all unpatched LOGO! versions are potentially affected.
-
Verify network exposureReview network architecture and firewall rules to determine if the LOGO! PLC is directly accessible from untrusted networks or the internet. Use network scanning tools (e.g., nmap) to check if ports used by LOGO! (typically port 10000/TCP for web server, port 10001/TCP for programming) are exposed externally.Affected if The LOGO! device management ports are accessible from untrusted networks without authentication barriers.
-
Check for time synchronization configurationAccess the LOGO! Comfort software, go to the device settings, and check if NTP time synchronization is configured. Also check if the device has any explicit time change protection or authentication enabled for time-related commands.Affected if The device lacks proper authentication or validation for time change commands and allows unauthenticated time modifications.
-
Review logs for unauthorized time changesIf the LOGO! device or associated network logs are available, search for any timestamps or log entries indicating unexpected or unauthorized time modifications, particularly from external IP addresses.Affected if Logs show time change events that were not initiated by authorized administrators.
A user is affected if they have an unpatched Siemens LOGO! PLC device exposed to untrusted network access where unauthenticated attackers can send time change requests.
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 network segmentation to restrict unauthorized access to the PLC network, and configure firewall rules to block external time manipulation requests. Monitor for unexpected time changes and consider applying vendor-provided compensating controls once available.
- Consultation8.0 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 $8,608.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-40817 — 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-2025-40817 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