CVE-2025-62817
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 Samsung Mobile Processor Exynos 1280, 2200, 1380, 1480, 2400, 1580, and 2500. A NULL pointer dereference of session->ncp_hdr_buf in __pilot_parsing_ncp() causes a denial of service.
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 NULL pointer dereference vulnerability exists in the __pilot_parsing_ncp() function of Samsung's Exynos mobile processors (1280, 2200, 1380, 1480, 2400, 1580, and 2500). The vulnerability occurs when session->ncp_hdr_buf is dereferenced without proper validation, causing a denial of service condition.
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 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 the processor model in your deviceCheck your device specifications or system information to determine if the device uses a Samsung Exynos processor. Common methods include checking the device info in Settings > About Phone, or using terminal commands like 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on Android.Affected if The device contains an Exynos 1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, or 2500 processor.
-
Confirm the specific Exynos variantReview the full device model number and confirm the exact Exynos variant. Some devices may have different regional variants using different processors.Affected if The device uses any of the affected Exynos variants: 1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, or 2500.
-
Check the baseband or modem firmware versionOn Android devices, access Settings > About Phone > Baseband version or use terminal commands like 'getprop gsm.version.baseband' to view the modem firmware version.Affected if The baseband/modem firmware is running on an affected Exynos processor (all versions of these processors are affected per the CVE).
A user is affected if their mobile device contains any of the listed Exynos processors (1280, 1380, 1480, 1580, 2200, 2400, or 2500) regardless of firmware version, as all versions contain the vulnerable __pilot_parsing_ncp() function with the unvalidated session->ncp_hdr_buf dereference.
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 vendor-supplied firmware/security updates from Samsung for affected Exynos processors. Users should ensure their devices receive the latest security patches through standard OTA update mechanisms.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $6,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62817 — 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-2025-62817 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