dbcve.org
Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2025-57247

CRITICAL · 9.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-06
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
The BATBToken smart contract (address 0xfbf1388408670c02f0dbbb74251d8ded1d63b7a2, Compiler Version v0.8.26+commit.8a97fa7a) contains incorrect access control implementation in whitelist management functions. The setColdWhiteList() and setSpecialAddress() functions in the base ERC20 contract are declared as public without proper access control modifiers, allowing any user to bypass transfer restrictions and manipulate special address settings. This enables unauthorized users to circumvent cold time transfer restrictions and potentially disrupt dividend distribution mechanisms, leading to privilege escalation and violation of the contract's intended tokenomics.

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 confidence

The BATBToken smart contract has a critical access control vulnerability where setColdWhiteList() and setSpecialAddress() functions are declared public without access control modifiers. This allows any external user to manipulate whitelist settings and bypass transfer restrictions, enabling privilege escalation and disruption of dividend distribution mechanisms.

MitigationAdd appropriate access control modifiers (e.g., onlyOwner) to the setColdWhiteList() and setSpecialAddress() functions and redeploy the corrected contract.

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
None
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 checks

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

  1. Identify if BATBToken contract is deployed
    Search your contract deployment records or blockchain explorers for contracts named BATBToken, or check your project dependencies for this contract
    Affected if You have deployed or use the BATBToken smart contract in your environment
  2. Locate the contract source code
    Obtain the deployed contract source code from a block explorer (e.g., Etherscan) or your project's version-controlled code repository
    Affected if Source code is available and can be inspected for function definitions
  3. Inspect setColdWhiteList function definition
    Search the source code for 'function setColdWhiteList' and check if it has an access control modifier like 'onlyOwner' before the function body
    Affected if The function is declared without an access control modifier (e.g., 'public' only, with no 'onlyOwner' or similar modifier)
  4. Inspect setSpecialAddress function definition
    Search the source code for 'function setSpecialAddress' and verify whether it includes an access control modifier such as 'onlyOwner'
    Affected if The function is declared without an access control modifier (e.g., 'public' only, with no 'onlyOwner' or similar modifier)
  5. Check contract verification status on block explorer
    If deployed on a public blockchain, verify if the contract source code is verified and matches what you expect - unverified contracts cannot be inspected this way
    Affected if You cannot verify the source code to confirm the functions are protected

Your environment is affected if you have deployed the BATBToken contract and either its setColdWhiteList() or setSpecialAddress() functions lack access control modifiers like onlyOwner, allowing any external caller to manipulate whitelist settings.

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

Add appropriate access control modifiers (e.g., onlyOwner) to the setColdWhiteList() and setSpecialAddress() functions and redeploy the corrected contract.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,440
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,504.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-57247 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2025-57247 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