CVE-2025-45333VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jun 2025Updated 30 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-45333: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% 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 25 Jun 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

AI-suggested

1. Monitor for official patches or updates from the berkeley-abc maintainers and apply them promptly once available. 2. Implement input validation and sanitization on all data fed into the Abc_NtkCecFraigPart function or related modules to prevent malformed or malicious input from triggering the null pointer dereference. 3. Employ runtime monitoring and automated crash detection mechanisms to quickly identify and respond to segmentation faults or abnormal program terminations. 4. Isolate the berkeley-abc execution environment using containerization or sandboxing to limit the impact of crashes and prevent potential escalation or lateral movement within the network. 5. For automated pipelines, introduce redundancy and failover mechanisms to maintain continuity in case of tool failure. 6. Restrict access to berkeley-abc tools to trusted users and environments to reduce the risk of malicious input being introduced. 7. Conduct code audits and static analysis on the affected modules if source code is available, to identify and remediate null pointer dereference issues proactively. 8. Educate developers and users of berkeley-abc about the vulnerability and encourage reporting of any anomalous behavior or crashes related to the affected function.

Description

berkeley-abc abc 1.1 contains a Null Pointer Dereference (NPD) vulnerability in the Abc_NtkCecFraigPart function of its data processing module, leading to unpredictable program behavior, causing segmentation faults, and program crashes.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-45333 would be on entities involved in semiconductor design, electronic design automation, and academic research institutions that utilize the berkeley-abc toolchain. The vulnerability could lead to denial of service conditions, disrupting workflows and potentially delaying critical design and verification processes. This disruption could have downstream effects on product development cycles, especially in industries reliant on rapid prototyping and verification such as automotive, telecommunications, and aerospace sectors prevalent in Europe. While the vulnerability does not appear to compromise data confidentiality or integrity directly, the availability impact could be significant in environments where continuous operation of EDA tools is essential. Additionally, if exploited in automated build or verification pipelines, it could cause cascading failures or require manual intervention, increasing operational costs and reducing efficiency. Given the lack of known exploits, the immediate risk is moderate; however, the potential for future exploitation exists if attackers develop methods to trigger the vulnerability remotely or via crafted input files. Organizations relying on berkeley-abc should consider the operational risks and potential downtime associated with this vulnerability.

CWE-476NULL Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #13OWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.
Implementation
For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished.
Requirements
Select a programming language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is non-null before acting upon it.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (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 25 Jun 2025, 19:56 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-476

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats