VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jan 2026

CVE-2025-53966: Samsung Mobile Processor Exynos · CVE-2025-53966 is a high-severity buffer overflow

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.4 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

Monitor Samsung and relevant Linux kernel security advisories closely for official patches addressing CVE-2025-53966 and apply them promptly once available.
Restrict local access to devices with affected Exynos processors by enforcing strict application whitelisting and limiting installation of untrusted apps.
Implement network segmentation and firewall rules to reduce the risk of local network attackers reaching vulnerable devices.
Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce security policies and monitor device behavior for signs of exploitation.
Disable or restrict use of NL80211 vendor commands if feasible, or apply kernel-level mitigations such as address space layout randomization (ASLR) and stack canaries to reduce exploitation risk.
Conduct security awareness training to minimize risks from social engineering that could lead to local access.
Prepare incident response plans specifically addressing potential exploitation of mobile device vulnerabilities.
For embedded systems using affected processors, consider isolating these devices and applying strict access controls until patches are available.

Description

CVE-2025-53966 is a high-severity buffer overflow vulnerability in Samsung Mobile Processor Exynos 1380, 1480, 2400, and 1580. It arises from incorrect handling of the NL80211 vendor command during IOCTL message processing, allowing an attacker with local access to trigger a buffer overflow without requiring privileges or user interaction. This vulnerability can lead to full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability of affected devices. No known exploits are currently in the wild, and no patches have been published yet. European organizations using devices with these Exynos processors, particularly in mobile or embedded environments, face risks of device compromise or service disruption. Mitigation requires close monitoring for vendor patches, restricting local access, and applying network-level controls to limit exposure. Countries with high adoption of Samsung mobile devices and strategic reliance on mobile communications are most at risk. Given the ease of exploitation and potential impact, this vulnerability is rated as high severity.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-53966 could be substantial, especially for those with large deployments of Samsung mobile devices using the affected Exynos processors. Exploitation could lead to full device compromise, allowing attackers to access sensitive data, disrupt device functionality, or pivot into corporate networks. This is particularly critical for sectors relying on mobile communications for operational continuity, such as finance, healthcare, and government. The vulnerability could also affect embedded systems using these processors, potentially impacting IoT devices or mobile edge computing platforms. Given the high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact, exploitation could result in data breaches, service outages, and loss of trust. The lack of required privileges or user interaction lowers the barrier for attackers, increasing the likelihood of exploitation in environments where local access is possible. Although no exploits are currently known, the vulnerability's nature and severity warrant urgent attention to avoid future attacks.

Summary

CVE-2025-53966 is a buffer overflow vulnerability identified in several Samsung Exynos mobile processors: 1380, 1480, 2400, and 1580. The flaw stems from improper handling of the NL80211 vendor command, which is part of the Linux wireless subsystem used for configuring wireless devices. Specifically, the vulnerability occurs during the processing of IOCTL (Input/Output Control) messages, which are used by user-space applications to communicate with kernel drivers. An attacker can craft a malicious NL80211 vendor command that triggers a buffer overflow in the kernel driver, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution or kernel memory corruption. The CVSS 3.1 score of 8.4 reflects high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, with low attack complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction needed. This means an attacker with local access (e.g., via a compromised app or local network access) can exploit the vulnerability without authentication. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-120 (Classic Buffer Overflow), a common and dangerous flaw that can lead to privilege escalation or denial of service. No patches have been released yet, and no exploits are publicly known, but the risk remains significant due to the widespread use of affected processors in Samsung mobile devices. Organizations relying on these devices should prepare for imminent remediation and consider interim protective measures.

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, 21:37 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-120

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats