CVE-2025-20042
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 cause information leak through out-of-bounds read.
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 an out-of-bounds read vulnerability that allows a local attacker to read sensitive information from memory locations outside the intended buffer boundaries.
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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 OpenHarmony versionRun 'syspara os.version' or check /system/etc/param/ohos.version file to obtain the installed OpenHarmony versionAffected if Version is between 4.1 and 5.0.2 inclusive (4.1 <= version <= 5.0.2)
-
Confirm OpenHarmony editionRun 'syspara ro.build.version_sdk' or check /system/build.prop to confirm this is Openatom OpenHarmony rather than another OpenHarmony distributionAffected if The system runs Openatom OpenHarmony with version in the affected range
-
Identify affected componentAudit running services and daemons that handle memory buffer operations; check component logs for out-of-bounds read errors or memory access violations in /var/log/Affected if A component that performs buffer/memory operations is active and the version is vulnerable
-
Check for local untrusted accessReview user access controls and file permissions on sensitive system directories; verify if untrusted local users can execute code or access system resourcesAffected if Untrusted local users have access to the system, as the vulnerability requires local attacker access
If the installed OpenHarmony version is 4.1 or higher but 5.0.2 or lower, the system is within the affected version range and may be vulnerable to out-of-bounds read attacks.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of OpenHarmony beyond v5.0.2 when available. If no patch exists, audit the affected component for missing bounds checks and implement proper array/buffer boundary validation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20042 — 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-2025-20042 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