Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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-2025-21780 is a high-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. 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 17th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — 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-2025-21780 is a buffer overflow vulnerability in the Linux kernel's drm/amdgpu subsystem, specifically within the smu_sys_set_pp_table() function. The issue arises when a malicious user supplies a small power play table (pptable) through sysfs, followed by a larger pptable, triggering a buffer overflow. It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and is associated with CWE-120 (Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input).
A local attacker with low privileges can exploit this vulnerability by interacting with the sysfs interface to deliver the crafted pptables. Successful exploitation leads to a buffer overflow, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution, data corruption, or system denial of service with high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Mitigation is provided through kernel patches available in stable releases, as documented in the following commit references: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1abb2648698bf10783d2236a6b4a7ca5e8021699, https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/231075c5a8ea54f34b7c4794687baa980814e6de, https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2498d2db1d35e88a2060ea191ae75dce853dd084, https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3484ea33157bc7334f57e64826ec5a4bf992151a, and https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e43a8b9c4d700ffec819c5043a48769b3e7d9cab. These commits resolve the buffer overflow by improving handling in smu_sys_set_pp_table(). Security practitioners should update affected Linux kernels with these fixes.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-5140
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/amdgpu: avoid buffer overflow attach in smu_sys_set_pp_table() It malicious user provides a small pptable through sysfs and then a bigger pptable, it may cause buffer overflow attack in function smu_sys_set_pp_table().
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.
Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.
Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.
Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.
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 directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.
Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.
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.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.
Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.