CVE-2025-43532VulnerabilityPublished 12 Dec 2025Updated 2 Apr 2026

CVE-2025-43532: Apple iOS and iPadOS · Processing malicious data may lead to unexpected app termination

Affects Apple iOS and iPadOSSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.8 Low · fixed in 18.7.3 : update Apple iOS and iPadOS when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.8Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 18.7.3

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 12 Dec 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 2026-10-25.

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
Apple iOS and iPadOS	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should prioritize applying the Apple security updates iOS 18.7.3, iPadOS 18.7.3, and corresponding patches for macOS, tvOS, visionOS, and watchOS as soon as possible to remediate this vulnerability. Beyond patching, implement strict device usage policies to limit exposure to untrusted data sources, especially on devices used in sensitive environments. Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce update compliance and monitor device health. Educate users about the risks of processing unknown or suspicious data and encourage cautious behavior to reduce the likelihood of triggering the vulnerability. For high-security environments, consider restricting local access and limiting installation of untrusted applications or files. Regularly audit and monitor application crash logs to detect potential exploitation attempts. Maintain backups and incident response plans to quickly recover from denial-of-service impacts if exploitation occurs.

Description

A memory corruption issue was addressed with improved bounds checking. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.3 and iPadOS 18.7.3, iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2, macOS Sequoia 15.7.3, macOS Sonoma 14.8.3, macOS Tahoe 26.2, tvOS 26.2, visionOS 26.2, watchOS 26.2. Processing malicious data may lead to unexpected app termination.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-43532 is availability degradation through unexpected application crashes on Apple devices. For organizations, this could translate into denial-of-service conditions affecting critical apps, potentially interrupting business operations or user productivity. Although the vulnerability does not allow data theft or manipulation, frequent or targeted exploitation could degrade user trust and system reliability. Environments heavily reliant on iOS/iPadOS for business-critical applications, such as mobile workforce management, healthcare, finance, or government sectors, may experience operational disruptions. The requirement for local access and user interaction reduces the likelihood of widespread automated attacks but does not eliminate targeted exploitation risks, especially in environments with shared or less controlled device access. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests a low immediate threat, but unpatched systems remain vulnerable to future attacks.

CWE-120Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #11
The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer.
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 · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V14.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Overflow Buffers (opens in a new tab)
Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
MIME Conversion (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, 02:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-120

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats