CVE-2025-54325
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 issue was discovered in VTS in Samsung Mobile Processor and Wearable Processor Exynos 1080, 1280, 2200, 1380, 1480, 2400, 1580, 2500, W920, W930, W1000. A race condition in the VTS driver results in an out-of-bounds read, leading to an information leak.
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 race condition in the VTS (Video Transfer Service) driver in Samsung Exynos mobile and wearable processors (1080, 1280, 2200, 1380, 1480, 2400, 1580, 2500, W920, W930, W1000) allows an attacker to trigger an out-of-bounds read, leading to information disclosure from kernel memory.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
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 processor modelCheck the device specifications or system information to determine if the chipset is a Samsung Exynos 1080, 1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, or 2500. On Android devices, this is typically found under Settings > About Phone > Chipset or Processor. For wearable devices, check the device specs or boot logs.Affected if The processor model matches one of the listed Exynos variants (1080, 1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, 2500)
-
Verify firmware versionCheck the firmware/build version of the device. On Android, go to Settings > About Phone > Software Information > Build Number. Compare this against Samsung's official SMR (Security Maintenance Release) dates and versions for your specific Exynos model.Affected if The device runs on any firmware version of the affected Exynos processors, as all versions are listed as affected
-
Confirm VTS driver presenceCheck if the Video Transfer Service (VTS) driver is present on the system. This may be visible in kernel logs, /proc/modules, or within the device's firmware image. The driver is typically named something related to 'vts' or 'video_transfer_service' in the kernel module list.Affected if The VTS driver is loaded or present on the device; the race condition exists specifically within this driver
If the device uses an affected Exynos processor model (1080, 1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, or 2500) and has the VTS driver present, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 Samsung's security maintenance release (SMR) containing the driver patch to affected devices; prioritize endpoints with direct exposure to untrusted inputs.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-54325 — 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-2025-54325 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