Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-1371

Memory Safety in Elfutils Project Elfutils 0.192

Published
17 February 2025
Modified
04 November 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 4.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0023 14th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-1371 is a medium-severity Improper Resource Shutdown or Release (CWE-404) vulnerability in Elfutils Project Elfutils. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 14th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability has been found in GNU elfutils 0.192 and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects the function handle_dynamic_symtab of the file readelf.c of the component eu-read. The manipulation leads to null pointer dereference. Attacking locally is a requirement. The…

more

exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The patch is identified as b38e562a4c907e08171c76b8b2def8464d5a104a. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-1377Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2024-25260Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2025-1376Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2025-1365Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2025-1352Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2025-1372Same product: Elfutils Project Elfutils
CVE-2026-1416Shared CWE-404, CWE-476
CVE-2025-15535Shared CWE-404, CWE-476
CVE-2026-1417Shared CWE-404, CWE-476
CVE-2026-1976Shared CWE-404, CWE-476

Affected Assets

elfutils project
elfutils
0.192

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-2 Flaw Remediation
  • AC-6 Least Privilege
  • CM-7 Least Functionality
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires applying the vendor patch (b38e562a) that eliminates the null-pointer dereference in handle_dynamic_symtab before the vulnerable eu-readelf binary can be exploited.

prevent

Enforces execution of eu-readelf only with the minimal privileges needed, limiting the impact of a local null-pointer crash to the attacker's own context.

prevent

Restricts installation or use of the eu-readelf component to only those systems that require ELF inspection, reducing the attack surface for the disclosed flaw.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly include coding standards for correct resource allocation and release.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring can detect resource exhaustion caused by improper shutdown or release.

ID.AM-08 partial match
prevents

Lifecycle management of assets can encompass proper resource release at end-of-life or shutdown.

PR.IR-04 partial match
prevents

Capacity management helps surface leaks from unreleased resources but does not prevent the coding flaw.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

detects

Security testing can detect NULL dereference defects before release.

prevents

Including restart, recovery and media-handling instructions reduces the likelihood that resources or sensitive data will be left in an exposed or improperly released state after a failure.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates defensive coding practices that can prevent NULL dereferences.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify input validation and pointer-safety rules.

prevents

Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design that avoids unsafe pointer use.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly require NULL-pointer checks and safe dereference patterns.

References