Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-20097

Published
12 February 2025
Modified
15 April 2026
CVSS Score v4 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/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 0.0046 38th percentile
Risk Priority 33 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-20097 is a medium-severity Uncaught Exception (CWE-248) vulnerability in Intel (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 38th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SC-24 (Fail in Known State) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A10:2025 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Uncaught exception in OpenBMC Firmware for the Intel(R) Server M50FCP Family and Intel(R) Server D50DNP Family before version R01.02.0002 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via network access.

CWE(s)
CWE-248

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
attack.mitre.org →
T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-22477Shared CWE-248
CVE-2026-14181Shared CWE-248
CVE-2025-20176Shared CWE-248
CVE-2024-34363Shared CWE-248
CVE-2026-32314Shared CWE-248
CVE-2025-20754Shared CWE-248
CVE-2024-58369Shared CWE-248
CVE-2023-4785Shared CWE-248
CVE-2025-71391Shared CWE-248
CVE-2025-43855Shared CWE-248

Affected Assets

Intel
—
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Security engineering principles include robust exception management to keep the system in a defined state.

SC-24 Fail in Known State partial match

Fail-in-known-state reduces the impact when an uncaught exception occurs by preserving a safe condition.

SI-11 Error Handling partial match

Error handling requirements force structured catching and response to exceptions instead of allowing them to propagate uncaught.

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 explicitly require structured exception handling to prevent uncaught exceptions from reaching production.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can detect uncaught exceptions before production deployment.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes exception-handling standards that reduce uncaught exceptions.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements typically mandate robust error and exception handling.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles call for centralized, comprehensive exception management.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards directly require catching and handling exceptions to prevent crashes or leaks.

References