CVE-2025-49495VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-49495: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.4 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.4High

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% 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:H/I:H/A:H

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

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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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

Organizations should prioritize monitoring for updates from Samsung and apply security patches promptly once released. Until patches are available, restrict local access to WiFi driver interfaces by enforcing strict device usage policies and limiting physical or local network access to trusted users only. Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce security configurations and monitor device behavior for anomalies indicative of exploitation attempts. Network segmentation can reduce the impact of compromised devices on critical infrastructure. Additionally, educating users about the risks of connecting to untrusted networks or installing unauthorized applications can reduce exposure. Security teams should also implement endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools capable of identifying unusual WiFi driver activity. Finally, collaborate with vendors and security communities to stay informed about emerging exploit techniques related to this vulnerability.

Description

CVE-2025-49495 is a high-severity buffer overflow vulnerability in the WiFi driver of Samsung Mobile Processors Exynos 1380, 1480, 2400, and 1580. It arises from improper handling of NL80211 vendor commands, allowing an attacker with local access to potentially execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service without requiring user interaction or privileges. The vulnerability impacts confidentiality, integrity, and availability of affected devices. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild. European organizations using devices with these Exynos processors, especially in sectors relying on mobile communications, may face risks if unpatched. Mitigation involves applying vendor patches once available, restricting local access to WiFi driver interfaces, and monitoring for anomalous device behavior. Countries with high Samsung mobile device penetration and critical infrastructure reliance on mobile connectivity, such as Germany, France, and the UK, are most likely affected. Given the ease of exploitation and broad impact, the threat severity is high.

Impact

For European organizations, the vulnerability threatens the security of mobile devices using affected Samsung Exynos processors, which are common in consumer and enterprise smartphones. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized code execution, enabling attackers to bypass security controls, access confidential information, or disrupt device availability. This is particularly critical for sectors relying on mobile communications for sensitive operations, such as finance, healthcare, and government. The vulnerability could also facilitate lateral movement within corporate networks if compromised devices connect to internal resources. The absence of required privileges or user interaction lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing risk. Additionally, the potential for denial of service could impact operational continuity. The threat is amplified in environments where mobile devices are used for multi-factor authentication or as endpoints for secure communications.

Summary

CVE-2025-49495 is a buffer overflow vulnerability identified in the WiFi driver of Samsung Mobile Processors Exynos 1380, 1480, 2400, and 1580. The root cause is the mishandling of NL80211 vendor commands, which are used for vendor-specific extensions to the Linux wireless stack. This mishandling allows an attacker to craft malicious vendor commands that overflow a buffer in the driver, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution or system crashes. The vulnerability does not require any privileges or user interaction, meaning an attacker with local access to the device's WiFi interface can exploit it. The CVSS v3.1 score of 8.4 reflects its high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, with low attack complexity and no required privileges or user interaction. Although no exploits have been reported in the wild yet, the vulnerability poses a significant risk due to the widespread use of affected Exynos processors in Samsung mobile devices. The flaw is categorized under CWE-120, indicating classic buffer overflow issues. The lack of available patches at the time of reporting means devices remain vulnerable until Samsung releases updates. The vulnerability could be leveraged to compromise device security, extract sensitive data, or disrupt mobile communications.

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

Description

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

WeaknessesCWE-120

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats