VulnerabilityPublished 11 Nov 2025Updated 14 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-31719: Unisoc (Shanghai) Technologies SC7731E/SC9832E/SC9863A/T310/T606/T612/T616/T610/T618/T750/T765/T760/T770/T820/S8000/T8300/T9300 · Improper Initialization

Affects Unisoc (Shanghai) Technologies SC7731E/SC9832E/SC9863A/T310/T606/T612/T616/T610/T618/T750/T765/T760/T770/T820/S8000/T8300/T9300Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.1Medium

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:L

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: 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: 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 11 Nov 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

Organizations should monitor Unisoc and device vendor advisories for patches addressing this vulnerability and apply updates promptly once available. In the interim, restrict physical and local access to devices with affected chipsets to trusted personnel only. Employ device management solutions to inventory and identify devices running vulnerable Unisoc chipsets and Android versions 13 to 16. Where feasible, consider replacing or isolating devices that cannot be patched. Implement additional layers of cryptographic verification outside the TEE when possible, such as server-side signature validation or multi-factor authentication, to mitigate risks from incorrect signatures. Educate users and administrators about the potential risks of local exploitation and enforce strict access controls. Regularly audit cryptographic operations and logs for anomalies that may indicate signature failures or tampering attempts. Collaborate with mobile device manufacturers and Unisoc for timely security updates and guidance.

Description

In TEE EcDSA algorithm, there is a possible memory consistency issue. This could lead to generated incorrect signature results with low probability.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact lies in the potential compromise of cryptographic integrity on devices using affected Unisoc chipsets. This could affect secure communications, authentication mechanisms, and digital signature validation processes relying on the TEE EcDSA implementation. Although the probability of incorrect signature generation is low, such errors could lead to denial of service in security-critical applications or undermine trust in device-generated signatures. The vulnerability does not expose confidential data directly but may disrupt availability and integrity of cryptographic functions. Organizations relying on mobile devices with these chipsets for secure access or sensitive operations may face increased risk of operational disruptions or security policy violations. The local attack vector and lack of required privileges reduce the likelihood of widespread remote exploitation but insider threats or compromised devices could exploit this flaw. The absence of known exploits currently limits immediate risk but proactive mitigation is advised.

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

unisoc.com/en/support/announcement/1987692028719517698 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 18 Nov 2025, 04:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-665

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats