CVE-2025-53082
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 · uneditedAn 'Arbitrary File Deletion' in Samsung DMS(Data Management Server) allows attackers to delete arbitrary files from unintended locations on the filesystem. Exploitation is restricted to specific, authorized private IP addresses.
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 confidenceSamsung DMS contains an arbitrary file deletion vulnerability allowing authenticated attackers from specific authorized private IP addresses to delete files outside the intended scope on the filesystem. This likely indicates a path traversal or insufficient authorization check in the file deletion functionality.
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>= 2.0.0, < 2.3.13.1>= 2.5.0.17, < 2.6.14.1>= 2.7.0.15, < 2.9.3.6CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Confirm Samsung Data Management Server is deployedIdentify if the Samsung Data Management Server (DMS) software or appliance is running in your environment. Check for processes named 'dms', 'samsungdms', or services listening on typical DMS ports (consult product documentation for your version).Affected if Samsung DMS is installed and running
-
Locate the firmware versionAccess the DMS administrative interface or check the system information page. The version is typically displayed in the 'About', 'System Info', or 'Version' section of the web UI or CLI. If using an appliance, the version may also be shown during boot or in a label.Affected if Unable to determine the version from the system
-
Compare version against affected rangesCompare your installed firmware version to the following affected ranges: 2.0.0 through 2.3.13.0 (any build before 2.3.13.1); 2.5.0.17 through 2.6.14.0 (any build before 2.6.14.1); 2.7.0.15 through 2.9.3.5 (any build before 2.9.3.6). Note that version 2.4.x.x and versions below 2.0.0 are NOT listed as affected.Affected if Installed version falls within any of the three vulnerable ranges: >= 2.0.0 and < 2.3.13.1, OR >= 2.5.0.17 and < 2.6.14.1, OR >= 2.7.0.15 and < 2.9.3.6
-
Verify network exposure to private IP addressesReview firewall rules, access control lists, or network segmentation settings that govern which IP addresses can reach the DMS management interface or API endpoints. The vulnerability specifically requires attackers to originate from authorized private IP addresses.Affected if DMS is accessible from untrusted private IP addresses or insufficiently restricted network segments
You are affected if Samsung DMS is running a firmware version within any of the three vulnerable ranges AND the system accepts connections from private IP addresses that are not explicitly trusted.
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 · scoped2.3.13.12.6.14.12.9.3.6
Apply vendor patch when available; meanwhile, restrict network access to the DMS server to only explicitly trusted IP addresses and implement additional file system ACLs to limit the service account's deletion permissions.
Upgrade to firmware version 2.3.13.1 (for 2.0.x branch), 2.6.14.1 (for 2.5.x/2.6.x branch), or 2.9.3.6 (for 2.7.x/2.9.x branch) - or the latest available version in each respective branch
- 1. Identify the current firmware version of the Samsung Data Management Server by accessing the server administration interface or checking system documentation.
- 2. Determine which version branch your current firmware belongs to (2.0.x, 2.5.x, or 2.7.x).
- 3. Obtain the appropriate patched firmware from Samsung's official support channels or security advisory page at security.samsungda.com.
- 4. For firmware 2.0.0-2.3.x: Upgrade to version 2.3.13.1 or later.
- 5. For firmware 2.5.0.17-2.6.x: Upgrade to version 2.6.14.1 or later.
- 6. For firmware 2.7.0.15-2.9.x: Upgrade to version 2.9.3.6 or later.
- 7. After upgrading, verify the fix by confirming the new firmware version is applied and testing that the arbitrary file deletion vulnerability is no longer exploitable.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-53082 — 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-2025-53082 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