CVE-2025-69515
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-69515 is a critical-severity Incorrectly Specified Destination in a Communication Channel (CWE-941) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, ranked at the 38th 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SC-7 (Boundary Protection) — 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-2025-69515 is a vulnerability affecting the JXL 9 Inch Car Android Double Din Player running Android v12.0. The issue enables attackers to force the infotainment system into accepting falsified GPS signals as legitimate, causing the device to report an incorrect or static location. Published on 2026-04-07, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H) and maps to CWE-941.
Remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low attack complexity, without requiring privileges or user interaction. Successful exploitation allows them to spoof GPS data, compromising the integrity and availability of location services on the infotainment system, while confidentiality remains unaffected.
Advisories and further details, including potential mitigations, are available at http://jxl.com and https://github.com/thorat-shubham/JXL_Infotainment_CVE-2025-69515/blob/main/README.md.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-209278
Vulnerability Data
An issue in JXL 9 Inch Car Android Double Din Player Android v12.0 allows attackers to force the infotainment system into accepting falsified GPS signals as legitimate, resulting in the device reporting an incorrect or static location.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Information flow enforcement policies can require that outgoing channels only connect to approved, correctly-specified destinations.
Boundary protection at managed interfaces can enforce that communications are directed only to authorized external endpoints.
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.
Hardened configuration baselines and change control prevent mis-specified endpoints from being deployed.
Network monitoring can detect traffic to wrong destinations but does not prevent the specification error itself.
Documented network data-flow diagrams directly reduce the chance of specifying an incorrect destination address.
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 can detect incorrect destinations, yet it is a detection rather than prevention control.
Network security controls enforce correct endpoint validation and routing, directly preventing mis-specified destinations.
Security of network services includes service endpoint verification, mitigating incorrect destination specification.
Network segregation reduces exposure but does not address destination specification within allowed segments.
Secure SDLC practices can catch destination errors during design, but coverage is indirect.
Application security requirements may mandate destination validation, yet the control is high-level.