CVE-2025-20650
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 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: ALPS09291294; Issue ID: MSV-2061.
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 component 'da' allows an out-of-bounds write, enabling local privilege escalation. Exploitation requires physical access to the device and user interaction, but no additional execution privileges are 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= 13.0= 14.0= 15.0= 21.02.0= 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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/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 exact product and OS versionRun 'cat /etc/os-release' on Linux-based systems, or check 'ro.build.version.release' via 'getprop' on Android. For RDK, check the firmware version via 'cat /version.txt' or vendor documentation.Affected if The OS version matches one of the affected ranges: Yocto 4.0, RDK 2022q3 or 2024q1, Android 13.0/14.0/15.0, or OpenWRT 21.02.0/23.05
-
Locate the 'da' componentSearch for any executable, library, or service named 'da' or containing 'da' in the name within common binary directories: 'find /usr/sbin /usr/bin /sbin /bin -name "*da*" 2>/dev/null' and check running processes with 'ps aux | grep -i da'.Affected if A component named 'da' exists on the system, as this is the vulnerable component referenced in the CVE.
-
Verify the device has exposed physical accessAssess whether the device is in a physically accessible location (e.g., unattended public areas, unlocked racks, or devices without tamper-evident hardware). Document the physical security controls in place.Affected if Physical access to the device is possible for an attacker, as exploitation requires physical access and user interaction.
-
Check for user interaction requirementsDetermine if the device has user-facing interfaces (console, UI, buttons) that could be manipulated during physical access. Identify if users have authenticated sessions that could be interrupted or exploited.Affected if User interaction is possible during physical access, as the CVE states exploitation requires both physical access and user interaction.
You are affected if your device runs any of the listed OS versions AND contains the 'da' component AND is physically accessible to an attacker who can induce user interaction.
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 ALPS09291294 and restrict physical access to the device until the update is deployed.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20650 — 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-2025-20650 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