CVE-2025-47357
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 · uneditedInformation Disclosure when a user-level driver performs QFPROM read or write operations on Fuse regions.
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 an information disclosure vulnerability in Qualcomm's user-level QFPROM (Qualcomm Fuse PROM) driver that allows unauthorized reading or writing to hardware fuse regions. These fuse regions typically store sensitive data such as cryptographic keys, secure boot keys, and calibration data. A local attacker with user-level access could potentially read sensitive information from these protected fuse regions that should be restricted.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- 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.
-
Identify the Qualcomm chipset modelCheck system hardware information (e.g., via /proc/cpuinfo, device tree, or firmware strings) to determine if the chipset matches one of the affected models: Qam8255p, Qam8620p, Qam8650p, Qam8775p, Qamsrv1h, Qamsrv1m, Qca6595, or Qca6595auAffected if The chipset is any of the listed models and all versions are affected
-
Verify presence of QFPROM user-level driverLook for QFPROM-related device nodes or drivers accessible from user space (common paths may include /dev/qfprom, /dev/fuse/qfprom, or similar entries in /dev or /sys depending on the platform)Affected if A QFPROM device node exists and is accessible from user space
-
Check permissions on QFPROM deviceInspect file permissions and ownership of the QFPROM device node (e.g., ls -la /dev/qfprom*) to determine if unprivileged users can open and interact with the driverAffected if The device is world-readable/writable or readable/writable by a group that includes unprivileged users
-
Test fuse read capability from user spaceAttempt to read from the QFPROM device using available user-level tools or APIs (such as qfprom_read or similar utilities if present) without elevated privilegesAffected if Fuse region data can be read without requiring root or trusted execution environment authentication
A user is affected if their device contains a Qualcomm chipset from the affected list AND the QFPROM driver is accessible from user space with insufficient access controls, allowing unprivileged reads to sensitive fuse regions.
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 dataRestrict user-level driver access to QFPROM fuse operations by implementing proper privilege separation, moving fuse operations to a trusted execution environment or kernel driver with appropriate access controls, and validating permissions before allowing read/write operations on fuse regions.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $14,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-47357 — 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-2025-47357 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