CVE-2025-65829
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 · uneditedThe ESP32 system on a chip (SoC) that powers the Meatmeet basestation device was found to lack Secure Boot. The Secure Boot feature ensures that only authenticated software can execute on the device. The Secure Boot process forms a chain of trust by verifying all mutable software entities involved in the Application Startup Flow. As a result, an attacker with physical access to the device can flash modified firmware to the device, resulting in the execution of malicious code upon startup.
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 confidenceThe ESP32 SoC in the Meatmeet basestation lacks Secure Boot, a critical security feature that verifies firmware integrity and authenticity before execution. Without Secure Boot, the device cannot establish a chain of trust, allowing an attacker with physical access to flash malicious firmware that executes at startup.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 1.0.34.4CVSS 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
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device modelLocate the device label or documentation to confirm it is a Meatmeet Pro Wifi & Bluetooth Meat ThermometerAffected if The device is a Meatmeet Pro Wifi & Bluetooth Meat Thermometer
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the device settings or system information to retrieve the current firmware version. This is typically found in the device mobile app, web interface, or by connecting to the device via serial/debug interfaceAffected if The firmware version is 1.0.34.4
-
Verify if Secure Boot is enabled on the ESP32Check the ESP32 flash partition table and efuse settings. On the device, inspect the boot configuration by reading the ESP32 efuses via esptool or by examining the build configuration (sdkconfig) if you have access to the firmware binary. Look for CONFIG_SECURE_BOOT_ENABLED or similar flagsAffected if Secure Boot is not enabled or the efuse SECURE_BOOT is not set
You are affected if you have a Meatmeet Pro Wifi & Bluetooth Meat Thermometer running firmware 1.0.34.4 and Secure Boot is not enabled on the ESP32 SoC.
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 dataEnable Secure Boot v2 on the ESP32, configure signed firmware images, and ensure all mutable software entities in the boot chain are validated before execution.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-65829 — 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-2025-65829 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