CVE-2023-20725
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 · uneditedIn preloader, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS07734004 / ALPS07874358 (For MT6880, MT6890, MT6980, MT6990 only); Issue ID: ALPS07734004 / ALPS07874358 (For MT6880, MT6890, MT6980, MT6990 only).
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 · high confidenceIn the MediaTek preloader component (boot ROM secondary program loader), a missing bounds check allows an out-of-bounds write, enabling local privilege escalation from System privileges. Affected chipsets are MT6880, MT6890, MT6980, and MT6990.
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= 2022q3= 12.0= 13.0= 19.07.0= 21.02.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 MediaTek chipset modelOn Android: run 'getprop ro.mediatek.platform' or 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' to find the chipset. On Linux/OpenWrt: run 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' or check dmesg for MediaTek hardware detection.Affected if The chipset matches MT6880, MT6890, MT6980, or MT6990.
-
Confirm the Android versionOn Android devices: run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' to check the Android version.Affected if The version is 12.0 or 13.0.
-
Confirm the OpenWrt versionOn OpenWrt: run 'cat /etc/os-release' or 'cat /proc/version' to identify the OpenWrt release version.Affected if The version is 19.07.0 or 21.02.0.
-
Confirm the RDK versionFor RDKcentral devices: check the firmware version or build identifier for the 2022q3 release.Affected if The version matches 2022q3.
A device is affected if it uses one of the affected MediaTek chipsets (MT6880, MT6890, MT6980, MT6990) AND runs an affected OS version (Android 12.0/13.0, OpenWrt 19.07.0/21.02.0, or RDK 2022q3).
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 dataApply the vendor patch (ALPS07734004/ALPS07874358) by updating the preloader firmware through the OEM/ODM firmware update channel for affected MediaTek SoCs.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-20725 — 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-2023-20725 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