Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-21577

DoS in Oracle Mysql Server 8.0.0 – 8.0.41

Published
15 April 2025
Modified
03 November 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0072 50th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-21577 is a medium-severity Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) vulnerability in Oracle Mysql Server. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked in the top 50% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) and SC-6 (Resource Availability) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Vulnerability in the MySQL Server product of Oracle MySQL (component: InnoDB). Supported versions that are affected are 8.0.0-8.0.41, 8.4.0-8.4.4 and 9.0.0-9.2.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows low privileged attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise MySQL Server. Successful attacks…

more

of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized ability to cause a hang or frequently repeatable crash (complete DOS) of MySQL Server. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 6.5 (Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-22009Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2025-53062Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2024-20978Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2026-34271Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2026-34303Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2025-53042Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2025-30705Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2026-21950Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2026-21948Same product: Oracle Mysql Server
CVE-2026-22004Same product: Oracle Mysql Server

Affected Assets

oracle
mysql server
8.0.0 — 8.0.41 · 8.4.0 — 8.4.4 · 9.0.0 — 9.2.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SC-5 Denial-of-service Protection
  • SC-6 Resource Availability
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)
  • SI-4 System Monitoring
Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires mechanisms to protect against or limit effects of denial-of-service attacks via resource exhaustion, matching the InnoDB crash/hang vector.

prevent

Mandates controls that ensure resource availability and prevent a single low-privileged session from monopolizing InnoDB resources.

detect

Enables monitoring of resource consumption patterns that would reveal an ongoing CWE-400 attack against MySQL.

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.IR-04 mostly match
prevents

Explicitly requires monitoring and maintaining resource capacity, directly addressing uncontrolled consumption to preserve availability.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Continuous monitoring of computing resources can detect resource exhaustion but does not itself enforce allocation limits.

PR.IR-03 partial match
prevents

Resilience mechanisms such as avoiding single points of failure indirectly reduce impact of resource exhaustion.

PR.PS-01 partial match
prevents

Hardened configuration baselines can include resource quotas and limits that constrain consumption.

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

Resource-utilization monitoring and alerting on bottlenecks or overloads limits the impact of denial-of-service or resource-exhaustion attacks.

prevents

By continuously monitoring utilization, stress-testing peak loads, and maintaining documented plans to scale or throttle resources, the control directly limits an attacker’s ability to drive a system into uncontrolled resource exhaustion.

detects

Pre-agreed severity-based prioritization and resource allocation during incident triage reduce the likelihood that an attacker-induced resource exhaustion will overwhelm the organization before corrective action is taken.

mitigates

Business-continuity plans that include resource-management controls reduce the likelihood that an attacker can trigger uncontrolled resource consumption by forcing the system into a degraded or fallback state.

mitigates

Defining RTOs and capacity requirements for ICT services during business-impact analysis forces organizations to provision sufficient resources and throttling mechanisms, reducing the likelihood that an attacker can induce denial-of-service through uncontrolled resource consumption.

detects

Early notification of anomalous resource consumption or system malfunctions enables throttling or isolation before availability is lost.

References