CVE-2025-24925
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 OpenHarmony v5.0.3 and prior versions allow a local attacker case DOS through missing release of memory.
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 confidenceOpenHarmony v5.0.3 and prior versions contain a memory leak where allocated memory is not properly released, allowing a local attacker to exhaust system resources and cause denial of service.
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<= 5.0.3CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 installed OpenHarmony versionRun the command to display the system version, such as 'cat /proc/version' or 'ohosver' if available, or check the system build information in the settingsAffected if The version displayed is 5.0.3 or any version prior to 5.0.3
-
Check system memory usageMonitor system memory consumption over time using commands like 'cat /proc/meminfo' or system monitoring tools, observing for continuously increasing memory usage that does not decreaseAffected if Memory usage steadily increases without returning to baseline levels during normal operation
-
Identify processes with abnormal memory growthUse process monitoring commands such as 'ps' or '/proc/<pid>/status' to examine memory usage (VmRSS/VmSize) of running processes over an extended periodAffected if One or more processes show continuous memory growth without stabilization or release
-
Review system logs for resource exhaustion eventsExamine system log files in /var/log or using 'dmesg' for out-of-memory (OOM) killer events, memory allocation failures, or resource exhaustion warningsAffected if Logs contain OOM events, memory allocation failures, or indications of system resource exhaustion
A user is affected if their OpenHarmony installation is version 5.0.3 or prior and exhibits symptoms of memory exhaustion such as continuously growing process memory usage or OOM events.
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 · scopedUpgrade to a patched version of OpenHarmony beyond v5.0.3 when available, or identify and patch the specific code path failing to release memory.
OpenHarmony 5.0.4 or later (verify release notes on gitee.com for exact version containing the fix)
- Check OpenHarmony release notes on gitee.com for version 5.0.4 or later releases
- Verify if CVE-2025-24925 is specifically addressed in the release notes
- If available, upgrade the OpenHarmony installation to version 5.0.4 or later
- After upgrade, verify the memory leak fix is applied by reviewing the specific code changes in the commit
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-24925 — 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-2025-24925 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