CVE-2025-20649
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 Bluetooth Stack SW, there is a possible information disclosure due to a missing permission check. This could lead to remote (proximal/adjacent) information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: WCNCR00396437; Issue ID: MSV-2184.
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 confidenceA missing permission check in the Bluetooth Stack SW allows an adjacent attacker to potentially read sensitive information without requiring any user interaction or elevated privileges. The vulnerability stems from insufficient access control validation within the Bluetooth communication 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<= 3.6= 23.05CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/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 Mediatek SDK versionCheck the installed Mediatek SDK version by reviewing SDK release notes, build metadata, or system information files. Typical locations include /etc/version, build logs, or SDK manifest files.Affected if The SDK version is 3.6 or earlier (versions <= 3.6 are affected)
-
Identify OpenWrt versionOn OpenWrt systems, run 'cat /etc/openwrt_version' or 'cat /etc/os-release' to determine the exact OpenWrt release version.Affected if The system is running OpenWrt version 23.05 (this specific version is affected)
-
Verify Bluetooth is enabledCheck if the Bluetooth stack is active on the system. On Linux-based systems, run 'rfkill list' or 'hciconfig' to see if Bluetooth adapters are present and not blocked. Also check for running Bluetooth daemons with 'ps | grep -i blue' or check /etc/init.d/ for Bluetooth startup scripts.Affected if Bluetooth is enabled and an adapter is active - the vulnerability requires Bluetooth to be running for an adjacent attacker to exploit the missing permission check
You are affected if your system runs Mediatek SDK <= 3.6 or OpenWrt 23.05, AND Bluetooth is enabled and functional, allowing an adjacent attacker within Bluetooth range to potentially read sensitive information without authentication.
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 (WCNCR00396437) to implement proper permission checks in the Bluetooth stack. Verify the fix through adjacent Bluetooth range testing to confirm information disclosure is prevented.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $5,472.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20649 — 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-2025-20649 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