CVE-2025-57176
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 · uneditedOn Ceragon Networks / Siklu Communication EtherHaul and MultiHaul Series microwave antennas before 2026-03-10, the rfpiped service on TCP port 555 allows unauthenticated file uploads to any writable location on the device. File upload packets use weak encryption (metadata only) with file contents transmitted in cleartext. No authentication or path validation is performed.
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 confidenceUnauthenticated file upload vulnerability in the rfpiped service on TCP port 555 of Ceragon/Siklu EtherHaul and MultiHaul Series microwave antennas. The service allows file uploads to any writable location on the device without authentication or path validation, with only weak metadata encryption while file contents are transmitted in cleartext.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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 Ceragon/Siklu microwave antenna devices on your networkReview your network inventory, device discovery logs, or scan for MAC OUI prefixes associated with Ceragon/Siklu vendors. Check device management interfaces or SNMP sysDescr values for 'EtherHaul', 'MultiHaul', 'Ceragon', or 'Siklu' strings.Affected if Any Ceragon/Siklu EtherHaul or MultiHaul Series device is present on your network
-
Verify TCP port 555 is accessibleRun a port scan against the identified device IPs using: nmap -p 555 <target> or nc -zv <target> 555. Check firewall rules and ACLs for inbound allow rules on port 555.Affected if TCP port 555 returns as open or filtered-open on any Ceragon/Siklu device
-
Confirm rfpiped service is enabledIf you have CLI or administrative access to the device, check for rfpiped process status or service configuration. Look for 'rfpiped' in running processes list or service startup configuration.Affected if The rfpiped service is running or enabled on the device
-
Assess network exposure of port 555Review network boundary controls, ACLs, and firewall rules to determine if TCP port 555 is reachable from untrusted network segments, the internet, or user-facing interfaces rather than only from management VLANs.Affected if Port 555 is reachable from any network segment that contains untrusted or non-administrative users
You are affected if you have any Ceragon/Siklu EtherHaul or MultiHaul Series device with TCP port 555 open and the rfpiped service enabled, especially if that port is accessible from networks outside your administrative or management zone.
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 dataApply vendor firmware update (released 2026-03-10 or later), or restrict network access to TCP port 555 and disable rfpiped service if not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-57176 — 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-2025-57176 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