CVE-2025-20668
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 scp, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege if a malicious actor has already obtained the System privilege. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS09625562; Issue ID: MSV-3027.
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 the scp utility allows an out-of-bounds write, creating a memory corruption vulnerability that can be exploited for local privilege escalation. The attacker requires prior System-level access to exploit this, and no user interaction is 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= 14.0= 15.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check Android OS versionRun 'getprop ro.build.version.release' or check Settings > About Phone > Android versionAffected if The version is exactly 14.0 or 15.0 (compare your installed version to the affected ranges)
-
Verify scp utility is presentRun 'which scp' or check for /system/bin/scp or /vendor/bin/scpAffected if The scp binary exists on the device and the Android version matches 14.0 or 15.0
-
Confirm scp is accessible to local usersRun 'ls -la /system/bin/scp' (or the path found above) and verify execute permissions for user/system contextAffected if The scp binary is executable by the context needed to trigger the bounds check flaw
The environment is affected if the Android device runs version 14.0 or 15.0 and has the scp utility present and accessible at the system level where the attacker has prior access.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the vendor patch ALPS09625562 to the affected scp implementation, ensuring the bounds checking is properly implemented in the file transfer logic.
- Contact your device OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) to confirm they have applied MediaTek patch ALPS09625562 to address CVE-2025-20668
- Verify with your device OEM that their Android security update for the affected Android versions (14.0, 15.0) includes the MediaTek SCP patch
- Apply the OEM-provided system update that incorporates the MediaTek security patch
- Confirm the device is running the patched MediaTek SCP firmware through your OEM's verification method
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $4,096.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20668 — 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-2025-20668 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