Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2025-29911 is a high-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Nasa Cryptolib. Its CVSS base score is 8.9 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
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.
CryptoLib, a NASA-developed software library implementing the CCSDS Space Data Link Security Protocol - Extended Procedures (SDLS-EP) for securing communications between spacecraft running the core Flight System (cFS) and ground stations, contains a critical heap buffer overflow vulnerability in versions 1.3.3 and prior. Identified as CVE-2025-29911, the flaw resides in the `Crypto_AOS_ProcessSecurity` function during processing of the Frame Error Control Field (FECF). The vulnerable code reads from the `p_ingest` buffer at offsets `current_managed_parameters_struct.max_frame_size - 2` and `current_managed_parameters_struct.max_frame_size - 1` without checking if the input length `len_ingest` meets or exceeds `max_frame_size`, resulting in a buffer overflow when the AOS frame length is insufficient. This issue maps to CWE-122 (Heap-based Buffer Overflow) and CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write), with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8.
A remote, unauthenticated attacker (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N) can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction by sending a maliciously crafted AOS frame. Successful exploitation reliably triggers a denial of service (DoS) due to the crash from the heap overflow, and may enable remote code execution (RCE) depending on the environment, granting high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts (C:H/I:H/A:H).
The primary advisory, published on the NASA CryptoLib GitHub repository (GHSA-7g6g-9gj4-8c68), confirms no patched versions exist as of the CVE publication date. Security practitioners should monitor for updates from the repository, implement input validation on AOS frame lengths prior to processing, and consider network segmentation or disabling affected CryptoLib functionality until patches are available.
This vulnerability affects space mission critical infrastructure, highlighting risks in satellite-ground communications where tampered frames could originate from compromised ground links or signal replay attacks, though no public evidence of real-world exploitation has been reported.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-6610
Vulnerability Data
CryptoLib provides a software-only solution using the CCSDS Space Data Link Security Protocol - Extended Procedures (SDLS-EP) to secure communications between a spacecraft running the core Flight System (cFS) and a ground station. A critical heap buffer overflow vulnerability was…
more
identified in the `Crypto_AOS_ProcessSecurity` function of CryptoLib versions 1.3.3 and prior. This vulnerability allows an attacker to trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) or potentially execute arbitrary code (RCE) by providing a maliciously crafted AOS frame with an insufficient length. The vulnerability lies in the function `Crypto_AOS_ProcessSecurity`, specifically during the processing of the Frame Error Control Field (FECF). The affected code attempts to read from the `p_ingest` buffer at indices `current_managed_parameters_struct.max_frame_size - 2` and `current_managed_parameters_struct.max_frame_size - 1` without verifying if `len_ingest` is sufficiently large. This leads to a heap buffer overflow when `len_ingest` is smaller than `max_frame_size`. As of time of publication, no known patched versions exist.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and memory-error detectors) can discover heap overflows after they have been coded.
Input validation enforces bounds checking on data written to heap buffers, directly stopping the overflow condition from being introduced.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Security engineering principles require use of memory-safe constructs and bounds-checked allocation routines that avoid introducing heap overflows.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability of a heap overflow to execute attacker-controlled code or corrupt adjacent structures.
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 require bounds checking and safe memory handling that prevent heap overflows.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover heap-overflow flaws but does not prevent their introduction in code.
Timely patching removes known heap-overflow instances after they exist.
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 and acceptance can detect heap overflows before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates practices that reduce the likelihood of introducing heap overflows.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory APIs that mitigate heap overflows.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safety and input-validation controls that address heap overflows.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe techniques (safe functions, bounds checks) that prevent heap-based buffer overflows.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.