Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-21101 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Dell Display Manager. Its CVSS base score is 6.6 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 1th 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 AC-6 (Least Privilege) and CM-5 (Access Restrictions for Change) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-2223
Vulnerability Data
Dell Display Manager, versions prior to 2.3.2.20, contain a race condition vulnerability. A local malicious user could potentially exploit this vulnerability during installation, leading to arbitrary folder or file deletion.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Least privilege directly limits the local user's rights so a race condition during install cannot be exploited to delete arbitrary files or folders.
Access restrictions for change enforce that only authorized processes may modify protected directories, blocking the unauthorized deletions enabled by the installer race condition.
Access enforcement mediates all file-system operations, preventing the malicious local user from succeeding with the deletion even if the race window is reached.
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 SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
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 can detect race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.
Change management reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.