CVE-2025-31172
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 · uneditedMemory write permission bypass vulnerability in the kernel futex module Impact: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect service confidentiality.
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 memory write permission bypass vulnerability exists in the Linux kernel's futex (fast userspace mutex) module. The futex mechanism is used for efficient userspace synchronization primitives. This bypass could allow a local attacker to write to protected memory regions, potentially leading to privilege escalation or service compromise.
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= 5.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm HarmonyOS versionCheck the installed HarmonyOS version using 'getprop ro.build.version.harmonyos' or 'cat /system/etc/version' or check the system settings about device info. For CLI access, use 'uname -a' if available.Affected if If the system is running exactly HarmonyOS version 5.0.0
-
Identify kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or check '/proc/version' to retrieve the kernel version string.Affected if If the kernel version matches the HarmonyOS 5.0.0 kernel build associated with this CVE
-
Check futex usageSearch for processes using futex syscalls by examining /proc/[pid]/syscall for processes or use 'strace -c' on a test application to observe futex call patterns.Affected if If the system has processes actively using futex operations (this is common in multithreaded applications)
-
Verify memory protection settingsCheck if seccomp or SELinux/AppArmor profiles are restricting futex operations by examining /proc/self/status for Seccomp field and checking security module status via 'getenforce' or 'aa-status'.Affected if If no additional memory protection mechanisms (seccomp, SELinux, AppArmor) are enforcing restrictions on futex memory access
A system is affected if it is running Huawei HarmonyOS version exactly 5.0.0 with the futex module actively used and no additional access controls blocking the futex memory write bypass.
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 appropriate kernel security patch when available. For production systems, test the patch thoroughly in non-production environments first, as kernel updates may require system reboots and can affect futex-dependent applications.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31172 — 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-2025-31172 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