CVE-2025-59702
Entrust Nshield 5C Firmware ≤ 13.6.12
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-59702 is a high-severity Observable Discrepancy (CWE-203) vulnerability in Entrust Nshield 5C Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique System Firmware (T1542.001); ranked at the 19th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to PE-3 (Physical Access Control) and SA-18 (Tamper Resistance and Detection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-200252
Vulnerability Data
Entrust nShield Connect XC, nShield 5c, and nShield HSMi through 13.6.11, or 13.7, allow a physically proximate attacker with elevated privileges to falsify tamper events by accessing internal components.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Vulnerabilities enable physical exploitation for privilege escalation (T1068), firmware modification for persistence and evasion (T1019, T1542.001, T1211), tamper event falsification and log editing for indicator removal (T1070), and impairment of hardware security defenses (T1562).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
- 9 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
V10.3.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires tamper-resistance and tamper-detection mechanisms in the HSM to stop falsification of tamper events via internal-component access.
Enforces physical access authorization and control for the HSM, blocking a physically proximate attacker from reaching internal components.
Monitors physical access to the HSM location, enabling detection of unauthorized proximity or component access that could falsify tamper events.
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.AA-05 directly enforces policy-based access management and least privilege, eliminating most improper-access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also covers implementation flaws and design gaps outside a single management control.
Hardened baselines and deviation monitoring directly eliminate most configuration-induced access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also encompasses code-level and design flaws outside the scope of configuration management alone.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent observable response discrepancies via consistent error handling and timing.
PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities/credentials that support but do not implement access-control decisions, so it only partially prevents CWE-284 in either direction.
Authentication directly blocks unauthenticated actors (partial prevention of CWE-284) but leaves authorization logic, policy enforcement, and role checks untouched, so the control neither eliminates nor fully mitigates the broader weakness.
PR.DS-01 encryption mitigates impact of failed access checks on stored data but neither implements nor constrains access-control logic itself.
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.
Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.
Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.
By enforcing explicit rules on which identities or groups may perform read, write, delete or execute operations and by denying anonymous access to sensitive data, the control directly stops the creation of overly permissive or missing access-control checks.
Requiring one-to-one mapping of identities to entities and timely removal of unused identities directly stops attackers from leveraging stale or shared accounts to bypass access restrictions.
By explicitly transferring security roles and responsibilities when personnel change jobs or leave, the control reduces the chance that former employees retain access rights they no longer need, thereby limiting improper access control.
Physical entry controls enforce explicit authorization and authentication at every access point, directly stopping unauthorized actors from reaching information-processing assets.