VulnerabilityPublished 14 Jan 2026Updated 20 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-0647: Arm Neoverse-N2 · Sensitive Information in Resource Not Removed Before Reuse

Affects Arm Neoverse-N2Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.9 High.

Data as of 5 Nov 2026, 00:01 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.9High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 6% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 5 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
ArmNeoverse-N2	Affected =0	Fixed in–
ArmNeoverse-V3AE	Affected =0	Fixed in–
ArmNeoverse-V3	Affected =0	Fixed in–
ArmNeoverse-V2	Affected =0	Fixed in–
ArmCortex-X925	Affected =0	Fixed in–
ArmCortex-X4	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Until a fix is provided, users should monitor vendor communications for updates and consider risk mitigation strategies appropriate for high-severity CPU vulnerabilities.

Description

CVE-2025-0647 is a vulnerability in Arm Neoverse-N2 CPUs where a CPP RCTX instruction may prevent proper TLB invalidation across processing elements, causing stale TLB entries to persist. This can lead to sensitive information being retained in resources after they should have been cleared. The issue affects the Neoverse-N2 processor and has a high severity rating with a CVSS score of 7.9.

Reports on CVE-2025-0647

GCP-2026-004GCP Compute Engine Security2026-10-26

Impact

The vulnerability can lead to the retention of sensitive information in TLB entries that should have been invalidated, potentially allowing unauthorized access to this information. The CVSS score of 7.9 with high confidentiality and integrity impact indicates a significant risk if exploited. However, there are no known exploits in the wild at this time.

Summary

This vulnerability involves the improper invalidation of Translation Lookaside Buffer (TLB) entries in certain Arm Neoverse-N2 CPUs. Specifically, when a CPP RCTX instruction is executed on one Processing Element (PE), it may inhibit TLB invalidation triggered by a TLBI instruction issued to the same or another PE within the shareability domain. As a result, stale TLB entries that should have been invalidated remain, potentially exposing sensitive information that should have been removed before resource reuse. This is categorized under CWE-226, indicating sensitive information is not properly cleared before reuse.

CWE-226Sensitive Information in Resource Not Removed Before Reuse (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product releases a resource such as memory or a file so that it can be made available for reuse, but it does not clear or "zeroize" the information contained in the resource before the product performs a critical state transition or makes the resource available for reuse by other entities.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
During critical state transitions, information not needed in the next state should be removed or overwritten with fixed patterns (such as all 0's) or random data, before the transition to the next state.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
When releasing, de-allocating, or deleting a resource, overwrite its data and relevant metadata with fixed patterns or random data. Be cautious about complex resource types whose underlying representation might be non-contiguous or change at a low level, such as how a file might be split into different chunks on a…
Implementation
Be careful using vfork() and fork() in security sensitive code. The process state will not be cleaned up and will contain traces of data from past use.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.6 (opens in a new tab)
V8.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Retrieve Embedded Sensitive Data (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

Reports on CVE-2025-0647

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Oct 2026, 06:05 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-226

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats