CVE-2025-29948VulnerabilityPublished 10 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-29948: AMD EPYC™ 9005 Series Processors · Improper Handling of Overlap Between Protected Memory Ranges

Affects AMD EPYC™ 9005 Series ProcessorsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
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: None: There is no impact to availability within 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: 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 Subsequent System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Subsequent 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 10 Feb 2026
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 2026-10-25.

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
AMDAMD EPYC™ 9005 Series Processors	Affected–	Fixed in–
AMDAMD EPYC™ Embedded 9005 Series Processors	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-29948, European organizations should: 1) Monitor AMD and OEM vendors for official firmware updates addressing this vulnerability and apply patches promptly once available. 2) Enforce strict access controls and auditing on hypervisor management interfaces to prevent unauthorized elevation to hypervisor-level privileges. 3) Implement robust host security measures, including multi-factor authentication and least privilege principles for administrators managing virtualized environments. 4) Employ runtime integrity monitoring and anomaly detection tools to identify suspicious hypervisor behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5) Segregate critical workloads and consider additional encryption or isolation layers beyond SEV where feasible. 6) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on virtualization infrastructure to detect potential privilege escalations. 7) Maintain comprehensive logging and incident response plans tailored to virtualization security incidents. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on hypervisor security hardening and proactive detection, which are crucial given the local and privileged nature of the threat.

Description

Improper access control in AMD Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) firmware could allow a malicious hypervisor to bypass RMP protections, potentially resulting in a loss of SEV-SNP guest memory integrity.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-29948 is primarily on the confidentiality and integrity of virtualized workloads protected by AMD SEV-SNP technology. Organizations relying on AMD EPYC 9005 processors in data centers, cloud service providers, and enterprises running sensitive virtual machines may face risks of unauthorized memory tampering by compromised or malicious hypervisors. This could lead to data corruption, leakage of sensitive information, or undermining of security guarantees provided by SEV. The vulnerability does not affect availability directly but could facilitate further attacks that degrade service reliability. Given the widespread use of AMD EPYC processors in European cloud infrastructure, especially in countries with advanced data center ecosystems, the threat could impact critical sectors such as finance, healthcare, and government services. The requirement for hypervisor-level access limits the attack surface to insiders or attackers who have already breached host controls, but the potential damage to guest VM integrity is significant. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but underscores the importance of patching and monitoring to prevent future exploitation.

CWE-1260Improper Handling of Overlap Between Protected Memory Ranges (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product allows address regions to overlap, which can result in the bypassing of intended memory protection.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that memory regions are isolated as intended and that access control (read/write) policies are used by hardware to protect privileged software.
Implementation
For all of the programmable memory protection regions, the memory protection unit (MPU) design can define a priority scheme.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Infected Memory (opens in a new tab)
Exploitation of Improperly Configured or Implemented Memory Protections (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

amd.com/en/resources/product-security/bulletin/AMD-SB-3023.html (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 18 Feb 2026, 10:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-1260

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats