VulnerabilityPublished 12 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-22834: AMI AptioV · Improper Initialization

Affects AMI AptioVSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.2 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.2Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 2% 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:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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

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: 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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 12 Aug 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 26 Oct 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.
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. Inventory and identify all systems running AMI AptioV BIOS version 5.0 within the organization. 2. Monitor vendor communications closely for official patches or firmware updates addressing CVE-2025-22834 and apply them promptly once available. 3. Restrict local administrative access strictly to trusted personnel and enforce strong access controls and auditing to detect unauthorized privilege escalations. 4. Implement endpoint security solutions that can detect anomalous BIOS or firmware behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Use hardware-based security features such as TPM and secure boot to help detect and prevent unauthorized BIOS modifications or improper initialization states. 6. Conduct regular security training to raise awareness about insider threats and the importance of safeguarding privileged accounts. 7. Employ network segmentation to limit lateral movement opportunities for attackers who gain local access. 8. Maintain comprehensive logging and monitoring of BIOS-related events and system boot processes to identify irregularities early.

Description

AMI APTIOV contains a vulnerability in BIOS where a user may cause “Improper Initialization” by local accessing. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may leave the resource in an unexpected state and potentially impact confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a moderate risk primarily to systems running AMI AptioV BIOS version 5.0. Since BIOS is foundational to system security, improper initialization could undermine trusted boot processes, potentially allowing attackers with local privileged access to bypass security controls or cause system failures. Confidentiality could be impacted if sensitive data is exposed due to improper hardware states. Integrity could be compromised if system components are misconfigured or corrupted during boot. Availability could be affected if the system becomes unstable or fails to boot properly. Organizations with critical infrastructure, financial services, healthcare, or government systems that rely on affected BIOS versions could face operational disruptions or data breaches. However, the requirement for local privileged access limits the threat to insiders or attackers who have already gained elevated access, reducing the risk of remote exploitation. Nonetheless, insider threats or lateral movement scenarios within networks could leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges or disrupt systems.

CWE-665Improper Initialization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product does not initialize or incorrectly initializes a resource, which might leave the resource in an unexpected state when it is accessed or used.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design
Identify all variables and data stores that receive information from external sources, and apply input validation to make sure that they are only initialized to expected values.
Implementation
Explicitly initialize all your variables and other data stores, either during declaration or just before the first usage.
Attack patterns
Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Leveraging Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

go.ami.com/hubfs/Security%20Advisories/2025/AMI-SA-2025006.pdf (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Aug 2025, 14:33 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-665

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats