CVE-2025-65822
Meatmeet Pro Wifi \& Bluetooth Meat Thermometer Firmware 1.0.34.4
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-65822 is a medium-severity On-Chip Debug and Test Interface With Improper Access Control (CWE-1191) vulnerability in Meatmeet Meatmeet Pro Wifi \& Bluetooth Meat Thermometer Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique OS Credential Dumping (T1003); ranked at the 11th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-202624
Vulnerability Data
The ESP32 system on a chip (SoC) that powers the Meatmeet Pro was found to have JTAG enabled. By leaving JTAG enabled on an ESP32 in a commercial product an attacker with physical access to the device can connect over…
more
this port and reflash the device's firmware with malicious code which will be executed upon running. As a result, the victim will lose access to the functionality of their device and the attack may gain unauthorized access to the victim's Wi-Fi network by re-connecting to the SSID defined in the NVS partition of the device.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
AC-3 directly requires enforcement of authorization checks on all logical access paths, which would block unauthorized use of the debug/test interface registers.
AC-6 requires restricting access rights to the minimum needed, limiting what an attacker reaching the debug interface can actually read or modify.
IA-3 requires device identification and authentication before any connection is established, which would apply to external debug or test equipment.
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.
Defining and enforcing access permissions directly addresses improper authorization to debug interfaces.
Managing physical access to assets covers control of on-chip debug/test ports and pins.
Authentication of hardware can help restrict debug interface use but is narrower than full access control.
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 can discover improper debug access but does not itself implement the control.
Physical perimeters can limit access to debug ports but do not address on-chip access-control logic.
Physical entry controls reduce the chance of an attacker reaching the chip but do not enforce on-chip debug authorization.
Privileged-access rules may extend to hardware debug interfaces, yet the control is not hardware-specific.
Secure SDLC encourages hardware security requirements but does not mandate debug-port controls.
Secure architecture principles include hardware access-control mechanisms for debug and test interfaces.