CVE-2025-20656
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 not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS09625423; Issue ID: MSV-3033.
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 confidenceThis is a memory corruption vulnerability in a MediaTek device administration (DA) component where a missing bounds check allows an out-of-bounds write. An attacker with physical access to the device can exploit this to achieve local privilege escalation without requiring any user interaction or additional execution privileges.
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= 2024q1= 12.0= 13.0= 14.0= 15.0= 21.02.0= 23.05all versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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 MediaTek chipset modelCheck /proc/cpuinfo or system settings for the SoC model number (Mt6781, Mt6789, Mt6835, or Mt6855)Affected if The device uses any of the four listed MediaTek chipsets (Mt6781, Mt6789, Mt6835, Mt6855)
-
Verify Android OS version on the deviceGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if The Android version is 12.0, 13.0, 14.0, or 15.0 and the device uses a MediaTek chipset from step 1
-
Check the firmware build for patch levelGo to Settings > About Phone > Build number, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' via ADBAffected if The security patch level is earlier than the vendor fix (ALPS09625423); no specific date provided, so compare to vendor documentation if available
-
Confirm device administration component accessInspect whether the MediaTek Device Administration service is exposed or accessible on the device (specific method varies by device/firmware)Affected if The DA component is present and accessible, which is the default state on affected MediaTek firmware
A user is affected if their device contains a MediaTek Mt6781, Mt6789, Mt6835, or Mt6855 chipset running Android 12-15 or one of the listed Yocto/RDK/OpenWRT versions, and the ALPS09625423 patch has not been applied.
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 (ALPS09625423) via firmware update. Since physical access is required, ensure devices are protected against unauthorized physical access and prioritize patching for devices in accessible environments.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,072.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20656 — 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-2025-20656 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