CVE-2025-43365VulnerabilityPublished 4 Nov 2025Updated 2 Apr 2026

CVE-2025-43365: Apple iOS and iPadOS · An unprivileged process may be able to terminate a root processes

Affects Apple iOS and iPadOSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.8 Low · fixed in 18.7.2 : update Apple iOS and iPadOS when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.8Low

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.
Patch: Available – fixed in 18.7.2

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 4 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 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Apple iOS and iPadOS	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-43365, organizations and users should promptly update all affected Apple devices to iOS and iPadOS versions 18.7.2 or 26 and later, where the vulnerability has been addressed through improved input validation. Beyond patching, organizations should enforce strict application control policies to limit the installation and execution of untrusted or unnecessary applications that could exploit this vulnerability. Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to monitor device health and detect abnormal process terminations or system instability that may indicate exploitation attempts. Educate users about the risks of interacting with untrusted applications or links that could trigger local exploits. Additionally, implement least privilege principles on devices to restrict unnecessary process permissions and reduce the attack surface. Regularly review and audit device logs for signs of denial-of-service attempts. Since exploitation requires user interaction, user awareness training can further reduce risk. Finally, maintain an incident response plan that includes procedures for addressing denial-of-service conditions on mobile devices.

Description

A denial-of-service issue was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.2 and iPadOS 18.7.2, iOS 26 and iPadOS 26. An unprivileged process may be able to terminate a root processes.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-43365 is denial of service, where critical root processes on iOS and iPadOS devices can be terminated by unprivileged processes. This can lead to system instability, application crashes, or forced device reboots, negatively affecting device availability and user productivity. While the vulnerability does not compromise confidentiality or integrity, the disruption of root processes can interrupt essential services and workflows, particularly in enterprise or mission-critical environments relying on Apple mobile devices. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation, reducing the risk of widespread attacks. However, targeted attacks or malware with local execution capabilities could leverage this vulnerability to degrade device functionality. Organizations with large deployments of iOS/iPadOS devices, especially those used in sensitive or operationally critical roles, may experience operational impacts if devices are not patched. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests limited immediate risk, but the potential for denial-of-service conditions warrants proactive mitigation to maintain system reliability.

CWE-20Improper Input Validation (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #18OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build "recognizers" for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of…
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (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
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Server Side Include (SSI) Injection (opens in a new tab)
Cross Zone Scripting (opens in a new tab)
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
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 3 Apr 2026, 02:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-20

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats