CVE-2025-5640VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-5640: PX4-Autopilot · Stack-based Buffer Overflow

Affects PX4-AutopilotSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · public exploit available (Exploit-DB) · 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: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 63% 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:N/VI:N/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: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
1 Exploit-DB entry, 21 days after disclosure
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

CVE ID reserved
by VulDB
2025-06-0411:43Z, 18 hours before disclosure
CVE published
on cve.org
2025-06-0506:00Z, t = 0
In Threat Radar
record ingested
2025-06-0506:13Z, 13 minutes after disclosure
First Exploit-DB entry (opens in a new tab)
PX4 Military UAV Autopilot 1.12.3 - Denial of Service (DoS)
2025-06-26, 21 days after disclosure

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
GitHubpx4/PX4-Autopilot`pkg:github/px4/PX4-Autopilot`Other threats	Affected =1.12.3	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should: 1) Immediately update PX4-Autopilot to a patched version once available, or apply any vendor-provided patches addressing CVE-2025-5640. 2) Restrict local access to UAV control systems and ground stations by enforcing strict physical security controls and network segmentation to limit exposure to untrusted users. 3) Implement robust authentication and access control mechanisms on systems interfacing with PX4-Autopilot to prevent unauthorized local access. 4) Monitor logs and system behavior for anomalies indicative of buffer overflow exploitation attempts, such as crashes or unexpected resets. 5) Conduct security audits and penetration testing focused on UAV control environments to identify and remediate other potential vulnerabilities. 6) Educate operators and administrators about the risks of local access exploitation and enforce policies minimizing unnecessary access to critical UAV components. 7) Employ runtime protections such as stack canaries and address space layout randomization (ASLR) where supported to reduce exploitation success likelihood. These measures, combined with timely patching, will significantly reduce the risk posed by this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability was found in PX4-Autopilot 1.12.3. It has been classified as problematic. This affects the function MavlinkReceiver::handle_message_trajectory_representation_waypoints of the file mavlink_receiver.cpp of the component TRAJECTORY_REPRESENTATION_WAYPOINTS Message Handler. The manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. Local access is required to approach this attack. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations utilizing PX4-Autopilot in their UAV operations—such as research institutions, commercial drone service providers, and defense contractors—the vulnerability poses a risk to operational safety and mission integrity. Exploitation could lead to denial of service or unauthorized code execution on the autopilot system, potentially causing drone crashes or mission failures. This could result in financial losses, safety hazards, and damage to organizational reputation. Given the local access requirement, the threat is more significant in environments where multiple users have physical or network-level access to the UAV control systems or ground stations. In sectors like logistics, agriculture, infrastructure inspection, and emergency response, where drones are increasingly integrated, disruption caused by this vulnerability could impact service delivery and regulatory compliance. Additionally, compromised UAVs could be leveraged for espionage or sabotage, raising concerns for critical infrastructure protection within Europe.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Jul 2025, 03:27 UTC

Public exploits and detection1 Exploit-DB entry

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats