Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-53702

Vimicro Vs-Ipc1002 Firmware 1.1.0.18

Published
23 October 2025
Modified
04 November 2025
CVSS Score v4 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
EPSS Score 0.0021 12th percentile
Risk Priority 34 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-53702 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Vimicro Vs-Ipc1002 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 12th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Vilar VS-IPC1002 IP cameras are vulnerable to DoS (Denial-of-Service) attacks. An unauthenticated attacker on the same local network might send a crafted request to /cgi-bin/action endpoint and render the device completely unresponsive. A manual restart of the device is required.…

more

The vendor did not respond in any way. Only version 1.1.0.18 was tested, other versions might be vulnerable as well.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1489 Service Stop Impact
Adversaries may stop or disable services on a system to render those services unavailable to legitimate users.
T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-53701Same product: Vimicro Vs-Ipc1002
CVE-2024-21587Shared CWE-755
CVE-2025-62711Shared CWE-755
CVE-2023-44488Shared CWE-755
CVE-2024-37284Shared CWE-755
CVE-2024-34638Shared CWE-755
CVE-2024-50202Shared CWE-755
CVE-2024-53063Shared CWE-755
CVE-2024-47489Shared CWE-755
CVE-2025-66622Shared CWE-755

Affected Assets

vimicro
vs-ipc1002 firmware
1.1.0.18

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Requires the system to fail to a known safe state on specified failures, limiting the impact of unhandled exceptional conditions.

Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures triggered by indicated failures, structurally preventing unhandled or mishandled exceptional conditions.

Requires generation of appropriate error messages on exceptional conditions, directly enforcing correct handling rather than silent or incorrect behavior.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing in development and acceptance verifies correct handling of exceptional conditions.

degrades

Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.

finds

Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates exception-handling requirements and testing that directly prevent improper handling of exceptional conditions.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly include handling of error and exceptional conditions.

References