VulnerabilityPublished 3 Mar 2026Updated 4 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-66363: Improper Initialization

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:55 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% 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 3 Mar 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

Currently, no official patches are available for CVE-2025-66363, so organizations and users should implement interim mitigations. Network operators can deploy filtering rules to detect and block malformed or suspicious DL NAS Transport messages at the network edge, reducing exposure to crafted attack traffic. Device manufacturers and Samsung should prioritize developing and distributing firmware updates that properly initialize memory buffers in the LBS component. Mobile device management (MDM) solutions can monitor device stability and flag unusual crashes potentially related to this vulnerability. Users should avoid connecting to untrusted or unsecured cellular networks where attackers might inject malicious NAS messages. Security teams should monitor threat intelligence feeds for emerging exploit code or proof-of-concept demonstrations to respond promptly. In the longer term, adopting defense-in-depth strategies including anomaly detection on signaling traffic and robust testing of memory handling in cellular protocol stacks will help prevent similar vulnerabilities.

Description

An issue was discovered in LBS in Samsung Mobile Processor Exynos 2200. There was no check for memory initialization within DL NAS Transport messages.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-66363 is on the availability of mobile devices using the Samsung Exynos 2200 processor. Exploitation could cause denial of service conditions, leading to device crashes or loss of LBS functionality, which may affect location-based applications and services. This disruption can degrade user experience and potentially impact critical services relying on accurate location data, such as emergency response or navigation. Since the vulnerability does not affect confidentiality or integrity, data theft or manipulation is not a direct concern. However, widespread exploitation could lead to large-scale service disruptions, especially in regions with high adoption of Samsung Exynos 2200 devices. Network operators might experience increased support calls or service degradation. The ease of exploitation without authentication or user interaction increases the risk of automated attacks or wormable scenarios, potentially affecting millions of devices globally. Organizations deploying mobile fleets or IoT devices based on this processor should be aware of the availability risks and prepare accordingly.

CWE-665Improper Initialization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product does not initialize or incorrectly initializes a resource, which might leave the resource in an unexpected state when it is accessed or used.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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
Identify all variables and data stores that receive information from external sources, and apply input validation to make sure that they are only initialized to expected values.
Implementation
Explicitly initialize all your variables and other data stores, either during declaration or just before the first usage.
Attack patterns
Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Leveraging Race Conditions (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 10 Mar 2026, 17:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-665

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats