CVE-2025-20011
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 OpenHarmony v5.0.2 and prior versions allow a local attacker case DOS through missing release of memory.
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 · moderate confidenceOpenHarmony v5.0.2 and prior versions contain a memory leak vulnerability where memory is not properly released during certain operations. A local attacker can exploit this to cause a Denial of Service by exhausting available memory resources through repeated triggering of the unaudited code path.
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>= 4.1, <= 5.0.2CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Check OpenHarmony versionLocate the system version information - typically found in system settings, about device, or by running 'getprop ro.build.version.release' or checking /etc/version.ini. Compare the installed version against the affected range: >= 4.1 AND <= 5.0.2Affected if The installed version falls within 4.1 through 5.0.2 inclusive
-
Identify the specific product/SDK buildDetermine the exact OpenHarmony SDK or distribution build number - check /system/etc/ohos.version or run 'bm dump -a' to list bundle manager information. Confirm it is an Openatom Openharmony buildAffected if The build is confirmed as Openatom Openharmony between versions 4.1 and 5.0.2
-
Monitor for memory leak symptomsObserve system memory usage over time using 'meminfo' or similar tools. Look for abnormal memory growth that does not return to baseline after repeated operations. Document which applications or services are running when memory consumption increasesAffected if Memory usage grows progressively without release during normal or repeated operations, indicating potential leak
-
Check for memory allocation without deallocation patternsIf source code access is available, audit code paths involving memory allocation (malloc/new) that lack corresponding free/delete calls, particularly in code added or modified between v4.1 and v5.0.2. Focus on code triggered by local operations that could be repeatedly invokedAffected if Code paths exist where memory is allocated during operations without being freed, and these paths are accessible to local attackers
You are affected if your OpenHarmony version is between 4.1 and 5.0.2 inclusive and you can reproduce memory growth during operations that trigger the unaudited code path.
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 dataUpdate to a version beyond v5.0.2 if available, or identify and patch the code path where memory allocation occurs without corresponding deallocation to prevent resource exhaustion.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20011 — 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-2025-20011 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