VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jul 2025Updated 4 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-2329: silabs.com OpenThread · Use of Uninitialized Resource

Affects silabs.com OpenThreadSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 09:15 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable system is bound to a protocol stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared proximity (e.g., Bluetooth, NFC, or IEEE 802.11) or logical network (e.g., local IP subnet), or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN within an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Jul 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubsiliconlabs/OpenThread`pkg:github/siliconlabs/OpenThread`Other threats	Affected =2.5.0 =2.6.0 =0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-2329, European organizations should implement several specific measures beyond generic best practices: 1) Monitor network traffic patterns to identify and limit excessive SPI communication bursts that could trigger the vulnerability. Implement rate limiting or traffic shaping at the device or network level to prevent high traffic conditions that cause buffer corruption. 2) Where possible, update OpenThread RCP firmware to versions that address this issue once Silicon Labs releases patches. Until patches are available, consider deploying compensating controls such as watchdog timers or automated device recovery mechanisms to minimize downtime from RCP resets. 3) Conduct thorough testing of IoT deployments under simulated high traffic loads to detect potential instability or DoS symptoms related to this vulnerability. 4) Segment IoT networks to isolate critical systems from less trusted or high-traffic zones, reducing the likelihood of widespread impact. 5) Engage with device vendors and integrators to confirm the presence of this vulnerability and coordinate timely remediation. 6) Maintain robust incident detection capabilities to quickly identify and respond to device resets or communication failures indicative of exploitation attempts. These targeted actions will help reduce the risk and operational impact of this vulnerability in real-world deployments.

Description

In high traffic environments, a Silicon Labs OpenThread RCP (see impacted versions) fails to clear the SPI transmit buffer and may send a corrupt packet over SPI to its host, causing the host to reset the RCP which results in a denial of service.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-2329 can be significant in sectors relying on IoT infrastructure and wireless mesh networks, such as smart cities, industrial automation, healthcare, and building management systems. The denial of service caused by RCP resets can lead to intermittent or prolonged loss of connectivity between devices, disrupting critical operations and data flows. In environments where real-time monitoring or control is essential, such as manufacturing plants or energy grids, this disruption could degrade operational efficiency or safety. Additionally, the failure mode could complicate incident response and troubleshooting due to unexpected device resets. Although the vulnerability does not directly compromise data confidentiality or integrity, the availability impact could indirectly affect business continuity and service reliability. European organizations with deployments of Silicon Labs OpenThread-based devices should be aware that the vulnerability requires high traffic conditions to manifest, so networks with dense device populations or heavy communication loads are more at risk. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat but does not eliminate the risk, especially as attackers may develop exploits once the vulnerability becomes widely known.

CWE-908Use of Uninitialized Resource (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product uses or accesses a resource that has not been initialized.
Implementation
Explicitly initialize the resource before use. If this is performed through an API function or standard procedure, follow all required steps.
Implementation
Pay close attention to complex conditionals that affect initialization, since some branches might not perform the initialization.
Implementation
Avoid race conditions (CWE-362) during initialization routines.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 5 Aug 2025, 00:38 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-908

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats