CVE-2025-20635
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 V6 DA, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege, if an attacker has physical access to the device, with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS09403752; Issue ID: MSV-2434.
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 confidenceA missing bounds check in V6 DA allows an out-of-bounds write vulnerability that can be exploited for local privilege escalation. The attacker requires physical access to the device and user interaction to trigger the exploit, with no additional execution privileges needed.
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= 4.0= 2022q3= 2024q1= 12.0= 13.0= 14.0= 15.0= 19.07.0= 21.02.0= 22.03.5CVSS 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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 your device's OS and exact versionRun 'cat /etc/os-release' or check the device's system information to determine the installed OS (Yocto, RDK B, Android, or OpenWRT) and its exact version number.Affected if The OS is Yocto 4.0, RDK B 2022q3 or 2024q1, Android 12.0/13.0/14.0/15.0, or OpenWRT 19.07.0/21.02.0/22.03.5.
-
Determine if V6 DA component is presentCheck for the presence of the V6 DA (V6 Data Abstraction) module or daemon on the system. Look for processes or services named 'v6da' or similar, or check /proc/modules and kernel config for V6 DA related components.Affected if The V6 DA component is loaded or running on the system.
-
Verify the patch ALPS09403752 statusCheck system logs, kernel messages, or contact the device vendor to determine if the bounds check patch ALPS09403752 has been applied to the V6 DA module.Affected if The patch is not applied or its status cannot be verified.
-
Assess physical access exposureEvaluate whether the device is located in an area where unauthorized physical access is possible, such as unattended public locations, shared spaces, or areas without proper access controls.Affected if Physical access to the device cannot be adequately controlled or restricted.
You are affected if your device runs one of the listed OS versions, has the V6 DA component enabled, lacks patch ALPS09403752, and is subject to potential physical access by untrusted parties.
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 patch ALPS09403752 to implement proper bounds checking in V6 DA. Until the patch is applied, limit physical access to affected devices and monitor for suspicious user interactions.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20635 — 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-2025-20635 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