Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-1433 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Autodesk Autocad. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-1433 is an Out-of-Bounds Read vulnerability (CWE-125) affecting Autodesk AutoCAD. The issue arises when AutoCAD parses a maliciously crafted MODEL file, potentially leading to exploitation. Published on 2025-03-13, it has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
A local attacker with no privileges can exploit this vulnerability by tricking a user into opening a malicious MODEL file in AutoCAD, which requires user interaction. Successful exploitation allows the attacker to cause a denial-of-service crash, read sensitive data from memory, or execute arbitrary code within the context of the AutoCAD process.
Autodesk's security advisory ADSK-SA-2025-0001 addresses this vulnerability. Mitigation involves applying the latest updates, available through Autodesk support resources such as the AutoCAD and AutoCAD LT 2022 update download page, with additional context provided in the Autodesk Access product overview.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-6376
Vulnerability Data
A maliciously crafted MODEL file, when parsed through Autodesk AutoCAD, can force an Out-of-Bounds Read vulnerability. A malicious actor can leverage this vulnerability to cause a crash, read sensitive data, or execute arbitrary code in the context of the current…
more
process.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
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.
Secure-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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.
Security testing in development and acceptance includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.