Improper Privilege ManagementWeakness · CWE-269

CVE-2025-53914

HIGH · 7.0 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-09-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
75/100
Remediation priority · High
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Excessive Privileges vulnerability in Calix GigaCenter ONT (Broadcom SoC modules) allows Privilege Abuse.This issue affects GigaCenter ONT: 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE, 812G, 813G, 818G.

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 confidence

Calix GigaCenter ONT devices (models 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE, 812G, 813G, 818G) based on Broadcom SoC modules contain an excessive privileges vulnerability allowing privilege abuse. Users or processes can perform actions beyond their intended authorization level.

MitigationContact Calix for available firmware updates addressing this vulnerability. In the interim, enforce network segmentation to limit exposure and audit user/account privileges to ensure least-privilege principles are applied.

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
Physical
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the GigaCenter ONT device model
    Access the device management interface or CLI and retrieve the exact model number (844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE, 812G, 813G, or 818G)
    Affected if The device model matches one of the affected models listed in the CVE (844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE, 812G, 813G, or 818G)
  2. Retrieve the device firmware version
    Access the device management interface or CLI and run the command to display firmware version (for example, 'show version' or check the system status page)
    Affected if The device runs a firmware version that falls within any affected version range (compare your version against the ranges provided by Calix for this CVE)
  3. Review all user accounts on the device
    Access the device user management section (typically in Settings > Users or via CLI command 'show users') and list all configured accounts
    Affected if There are user accounts present that should not exist or that were not created by an authorized administrator
  4. Audit assigned privilege levels
    For each user account, check the assigned privilege level, role, or access group (typically found in the user management interface under privileges or access rights)
    Affected if Any user account has a privilege level higher than expected for their role, or users have administrative/root privileges they should not possess
  5. Verify least-privilege configuration
    Cross-reference each user's assigned privileges against the principle of least-privilege: confirm users can only access features and perform actions necessary for their job function
    Affected if Users have the ability to perform administrative or privileged actions beyond their intended authorization level

The device is affected if it is a Calix GigaCenter ONT model 844E, 844G, 844GE, 854GE, 812G, 813G, or 818G running a vulnerable firmware version and has user accounts with elevated privileges beyond their intended authorization level.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Contact Calix for available firmware updates addressing this vulnerability. In the interim, enforce network segmentation to limit exposure and audit user/account privileges to ensure least-privilege principles are applied.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-53914 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-53914 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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