Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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:XSummary
CVE-2025-23397 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Siemens Teamcenter Visualization. Its CVSS base score is 7.3 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked at the 6th 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 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-2025-23397 is a memory corruption vulnerability (CWE-119) affecting Siemens Teamcenter Visualization versions V14.3 (all versions prior to V14.3.0.13), V2312 (prior to V2312.0009), V2406 (prior to V2406.0007), and V2412 (prior to V2412.0002), as well as Tecnomatix Plant Simulation versions V2302 (prior to V2302.0021) and V2404 (prior to V2404.0010). The issue arises during the parsing of specially crafted WRL files, which can trigger the corruption.
With 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), the vulnerability can be exploited by a local attacker requiring no privileges but relying on user interaction. An attacker could craft a malicious WRL file and convince a user to open it within an affected application, potentially achieving arbitrary code execution in the context of the current process.
The Siemens product CERT advisory (SSA-050438) details mitigation through updating to the specified patched versions or later. Further information, including full patch details, is available at https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/html/ssa-050438.html.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-7631
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability has been identified in Teamcenter Visualization V14.3 (All versions < V14.3.0.13), Teamcenter Visualization V2312 (All versions < V2312.0009), Teamcenter Visualization V2406 (All versions < V2406.0007), Teamcenter Visualization V2412 (All versions < V2412.0002), Tecnomatix Plant Simulation V2302 (All versions…
more
< V2302.0021), Tecnomatix Plant Simulation V2404 (All versions < V2404.0010). The affected application is vulnerable to memory corruption while parsing specially crafted WRL files. This could allow an attacker to execute code in the context of the current process.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.