Improper Access ControlWeakness · CWE-284

CVE-2025-61234

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
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
Incorrect access control on Dataphone A920 v2025.07.161103 exposes a service on port 8888 by default on the local network without authentication. This allows an attacker to interact with the device via a TCP socket without credentials. Additionally, sending an HTTP request to the service on port 8888 triggers an error in the response, which exposes the functionality, headers identifying Paytef dataphone packets, and the build version.

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 Dataphone A920 v2025.07.161103 exposes an unauthenticated TCP service on port 8888 by default on the local network, allowing any attacker to interact with the device without credentials. Error responses from this service leak sensitive information including Paytef dataphone packet headers and the device build version.

MitigationRestrict network access to port 8888 through firewall rules or network segmentation to prevent unauthorized local access, and apply any vendor-supplied patches when available.

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
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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

  1. Verify if port 8888 is open and listening
    Run a port scan against the target device or network segment: 'nmap -p 8888 <target_ip>' or 'netstat -an | grep 8888' if you have local access
    Affected if Port 8888 is found open and listening on the device
  2. Confirm the TCP service accepts connections without authentication
    Attempt a TCP connection to port 8888 using telnet, netcat, or a simple socket test: 'nc -nv <target_ip> 8888' and observe if any response is received without providing credentials
    Affected if The service responds to TCP connections without requiring any authentication
  3. Check if error responses leak sensitive information
    Send a malformed or unexpected request to port 8888 and capture the response: 'echo 'test' | nc <target_ip> 8888' and examine the error output for Paytef dataphone packet headers or build version strings
    Affected if Error responses contain Paytef packet headers or device build version information
  4. Identify the device firmware version
    Access the device web interface, check system settings, or query the device through its management protocol to retrieve the firmware version; compare against v2025.07.161103
    Affected if The device is running firmware version v2025.07.161103
  5. Verify network accessibility of port 8888
    Confirm whether port 8888 is bound to all interfaces (0.0.0.0) rather than localhost only, which would make it accessible from the local network; review device network configuration
    Affected if Port 8888 is listening on all network interfaces and reachable from local network segments

The device is affected if port 8888 is open, accessible from the network, accepts unauthenticated connections, and is running firmware version v2025.07.161103 with error responses that leak sensitive information.

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

Restrict network access to port 8888 through firewall rules or network segmentation to prevent unauthorized local access, and apply any vendor-supplied patches when available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,800
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,880.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-61234 — 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-2025-61234 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