CVE-2025-43706VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-43706: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 26% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Jan 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 2026-10-26.

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

AI-suggested

1. Engage with Samsung and device vendors to obtain and deploy firmware or software updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available. 2. Implement network-level filtering to detect and block malformed or suspicious RRC packets at the cellular network edge, leveraging telecom provider cooperation. 3. Monitor device and network logs for unusual disconnections or crashes that may indicate exploitation attempts. 4. For enterprise environments, enforce device management policies that allow rapid patch deployment and device quarantine if instability is detected. 5. Collaborate with mobile network operators to apply mitigations or patches within network infrastructure to reduce attack surface. 6. Educate users and IT staff about potential device instability symptoms and reporting procedures. 7. Consider deploying fallback communication methods or redundancy for critical operations relying on affected devices. 8. Conduct penetration testing and vulnerability assessments focusing on cellular connectivity and device resilience to malformed RRC traffic.

Description

CVE-2025-43706 is a high-severity vulnerability affecting multiple Samsung Exynos processors used in mobile devices, wearables, and modems. The flaw arises from incorrect handling of RRC (Radio Resource Control) packets at the L2 layer, which can be exploited remotely without authentication or user interaction to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). This vulnerability impacts the availability of affected devices by potentially crashing or disabling network connectivity. Although no known exploits are currently reported in the wild, the ease of exploitation and broad device usage pose a significant risk. European organizations relying on Samsung-based mobile and IoT devices could face operational disruptions, especially in sectors dependent on continuous connectivity. Mitigation requires close collaboration with device manufacturers for firmware updates and network-level protections. Countries with high Samsung device penetration and advanced mobile infrastructure, such as Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Spain, are most likely to be affected. Given the vulnerability’s characteristics, the severity is assessed as high, emphasizing the need for proactive defense measures.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-43706 is on the availability of devices using affected Samsung Exynos processors. This includes smartphones, wearables, and IoT devices that are integral to business operations, communications, and critical infrastructure monitoring. Disruptions could lead to loss of connectivity, degraded service quality, and operational downtime. Sectors such as telecommunications, healthcare (wearables), logistics (IoT tracking), and public safety could experience significant operational challenges. Additionally, enterprises relying on mobile workforce devices or wearable tech for productivity and monitoring may face interruptions. The lack of confidentiality or integrity impact limits data breach risks, but availability issues can cascade into broader business continuity problems. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits given the low complexity of attack. European mobile networks and service providers could also see increased support costs and customer dissatisfaction if devices become unstable or unreachable.

Summary

CVE-2025-43706 is a vulnerability identified in the L2 layer of several Samsung Exynos processors, including mobile, wearable, and modem variants such as Exynos 980, 990, 850, 1080, 2400, 1580, 9110, W920, W930, and modems 5123 and 5400. The issue stems from improper handling of Radio Resource Control (RRC) packets, which are critical for managing radio connections between devices and cellular networks. This mishandling can be triggered remotely by sending crafted RRC packets, leading to a Denial of Service condition. The vulnerability does not require any privileges or user interaction, making it remotely exploitable over the network. The impact is limited to availability, with no direct compromise of confidentiality or integrity. The CVSS v3.1 score is 7.5 (high), reflecting the network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction. The CWE classification is CWE-400, indicating a resource exhaustion or DoS condition. No patches or exploits are currently publicly available, but the broad range of affected processors embedded in many Samsung devices increases the potential attack surface. The vulnerability could disrupt device connectivity, affecting mobile communications and IoT operations reliant on these chipsets.

CWE-400Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended. A strong authentication and access control model will help prevent such attacks from occurring in the first place.
Architecture and Design
Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either: recognizes the attack and denies that user further access for a given amount of time, or; uniformly throttles all requests in order to make it more difficult to consume resources more quickly than they can again be freed.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that protocols have specific limits of scale placed on them.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Regular Expression Exponential Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Sustained Client Engagement (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

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Jan 2026, 21:36 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-400

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats