Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-48508

Published
11 February 2026
Modified
15 April 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 6.0
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0015 5th percentile
Risk Priority 38 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-48508 is a medium-severity Improper Finite State Machines (FSMs) in Hardware Logic (CWE-1245) vulnerability in Amd (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 6.0 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 5th 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 SC-24 (Fail in Known State) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper Hardware reset flow logic in the GPU GFX Hardware IP block could allow a privileged attacker in a guest virtual machine to control reset operation potentially causing host or GPU crash or reset resulting in denial of service.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-31068Shared CWE-1245
CVE-2024-24968Shared CWE-1245
CVE-2024-21853Shared CWE-1245
CVE-2024-58311Shared CWE-1245

Affected Assets

Amd
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation at post-design stages can discover undefined or insecure FSM states through simulation and formal verification.

Forcing a transition to a known safe state on failure limits the impact of an attacker-driven undefined FSM state.

Requiring the developer to produce a security architecture and design description forces explicit FSM modeling and review before implementation.

Security engineering principles applied during hardware design directly reduce the chance of introducing faulty FSM transitions or unreachable states.

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.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure development practices and verification throughout the lifecycle directly prevent faulty FSM implementations in hardware logic.

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.

finds

Security testing in development can discover undefined FSM states before deployment.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes hardware design reviews that can catch FSM flaws.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles directly address proper FSM design and state validation.

prevents

Secure coding guidelines can extend to hardware description languages to prevent FSM coding errors.

none

Change management ensures hardware logic modifications do not introduce new FSM weaknesses.

References