CVE-2025-5297VulnerabilityPublished 28 May 2025

CVE-2025-5297: SourceCodester Computer Store System · Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Affects SourceCodester Computer Store SystemSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 28 May 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
GitHubbyxs0x0/cve`pkg:github/byxs0x0/cve`Other threats	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include restricting local access to the affected system to only trusted and necessary personnel, minimizing the attack surface. 2. Implement strict user privilege management to ensure users have only the minimum required permissions, reducing the risk of exploitation by low-privilege users. 3. Conduct a thorough code review and apply secure coding practices to the 'Add' function and related input handling routines to prevent buffer overflows. 4. Develop and deploy a patch that properly validates and bounds-checks input parameters for laptopcompany, RAM, and Processor fields before processing. 5. Employ runtime protections such as stack canaries, Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), and Data Execution Prevention (DEP) on the host systems to mitigate exploitation impact. 6. Monitor local system logs for unusual activity or crashes that could indicate attempted exploitation. 7. Consider network segmentation to isolate the computer store system from broader enterprise networks, limiting lateral movement in case of compromise. 8. Educate staff about the risks of local exploitation and enforce policies against unauthorized software or script execution on these systems.

Description

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in SourceCodester Computer Store System 1.0. This issue affects the function Add of the file main.c. The manipulation of the argument laptopcompany/RAM/Processor leads to stack-based buffer overflow. An attack has to be approached locally. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations using the SourceCodester Computer Store System 1.0, this vulnerability presents a moderate risk primarily in environments where local access is possible by untrusted or semi-trusted users. The impact is limited by the need for local privileges, so remote attackers cannot exploit this directly. However, in retail or inventory management contexts where multiple employees or contractors have access to the system, an attacker could leverage this flaw to escalate privileges or execute arbitrary code, potentially leading to unauthorized data access or disruption of store operations. Given the nature of the system, sensitive customer or inventory data could be exposed or manipulated. The medium severity rating suggests that while this is not an immediate critical threat, it should be addressed promptly to prevent potential lateral movement or privilege escalation within the network. European organizations with strict data protection regulations (e.g., GDPR) must consider the risk of data breaches resulting from exploitation of this vulnerability, which could lead to regulatory penalties and reputational damage.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Jul 2025, 01:42 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats