Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-48510

Amd Uprof ≤ 5.0.1174

Published
24 November 2025
Modified
26 November 2025
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0012 2th percentile
Risk Priority 50 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-48510 is a high-severity Unexpected Status Code or Return Value (CWE-394) vulnerability in Amd Uprof. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 2th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A10:2025 Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper return value within AMD uProf can allow a local attacker to bypass KSLR, potentially resulting in loss of confidentiality or availability.

CWE(s)
CWE-394

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-48511Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2025-48502Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2023-31348Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2023-31349Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2025-29933Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2023-31341Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2024-36340Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2023-31366Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2026-0466Same product: Amd Uprof
CVE-2023-20555Same vendor: Amd

Affected Assets

amd
uprof
≤ 5.0.1174 · ≤ 5.0.1223 · ≤ 5.0.1479

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation at post-design stages will find missing or incorrect checks for unexpected but valid return values.

SA-15 Development Process, Standards, and Tools partial match

Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate exhaustive checking of all function return values.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Engineering principles such as defensive programming and complete return-value checking stop the weakness from being introduced in code.

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 SDLC practices directly require proper validation of all function return values and status codes.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can detect missing checks for unexpected but valid return values.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development lifecycle requires handling of all return values and status codes.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements include proper validation of function results and error conditions.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards directly mandate checking all legitimate return values and status codes.

References