CVE-2025-20993VulnerabilityPublished 4 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-20993: Samsung Mobile Devices · Heap-based Buffer Overflow

Affects Samsung Mobile DevicesSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 3% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 4 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 2026-10-26.

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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC 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

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation involves restricting local access to Samsung mobile devices, enforcing strong physical security controls, and limiting the installation of untrusted applications that could exploit the vulnerability. 2. Monitor for updates from Samsung Mobile, particularly the SMR June 2025 Release 1, and prioritize timely deployment of patches once available. 3. Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce security policies, control application installations, and detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 4. Conduct regular security audits and integrity checks on mobile devices to identify signs of memory corruption or unauthorized modifications. 5. Educate users about the risks of installing unverified apps and the importance of device security hygiene. 6. For high-risk environments, consider isolating or restricting the use of vulnerable Samsung devices until patches are applied. 7. Implement runtime protections such as address space layout randomization (ASLR) and heap protection mechanisms where possible to reduce exploitation success.

Description

Out-of-bounds write in libsecimaging.camera.samsung.so prior to SMR Jun-2025 Release 1 allows local attackers to write out-of-bounds memory.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-20993 is primarily on the integrity of Samsung mobile devices used within corporate environments. Since the vulnerability requires local access, the risk is higher in scenarios where devices are shared, physically accessible by attackers, or compromised through malicious applications installed on the device. Potential impacts include unauthorized modification of application data or system components, which could facilitate privilege escalation or persistence of malicious code. This could undermine the security posture of mobile endpoints, leading to data tampering or aiding lateral movement within enterprise networks. Although confidentiality and availability are not directly affected, the integrity compromise could indirectly lead to broader security incidents. Organizations relying heavily on Samsung mobile devices for sensitive communications or operational tasks should consider this vulnerability a moderate risk, especially in sectors with high regulatory requirements such as finance, healthcare, and government. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat levels but does not eliminate the risk of future exploitation once the vulnerability details become widely known.

CWE-122Heap-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #16
A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
Pre-design: Use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

security.samsungmobile.com/securityUpdate.smsb?year=2025&month=06 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 5 Jul 2025, 23:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-122

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats