CVE-2025-5827
Memory Safety in Autel Maxicharger Ac Elite Business C50 Firmware ≤ 1.39.51
Raw vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-5827 is a high-severity Stack-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-121) vulnerability in Autel Maxicharger Ac Elite Business C50 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 27th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-28669
Vulnerability Data
Autel MaxiCharger AC Wallbox Commercial ble_process_esp32_msg Stack-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Autel MaxiCharger AC Wallbox Commercial EV chargers. Authentication is not required to exploit this…
more
vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the ble_process_esp32_msg function. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length stack-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the device. Was ZDI-CAN-26369.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 2 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can discover stack-buffer overflows before deployment.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from exceeding stack buffer bounds.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability to execute injected code after a stack overflow.
Secure-engineering principles include bounds-checked coding and safe buffer handling that avoid introducing the flaw.
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.
Secure-development practices directly prevent introduction of stack buffer overflows.
Vulnerability scanning can discover stack buffer overflows but does not prevent their introduction.
Patching eliminates known instances of the weakness after discovery.
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.
Security testing (fuzzing, static analysis) detects stack overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates buffer-safety practices that directly prevent stack overflows.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and input-validation rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and least-privilege stack usage.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer handling that causes CWE-121.
Change-management gates can enforce security reviews that catch buffer issues.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248594 OL 8 must implement address space layout randomization (ASLR) to protect its memory from unauthorized code execution. prevents CWE-121
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-121