Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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-2025-9020 is a low-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 2.0 (Low).
Operationally, 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 SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and CM-7 (Least Functionality) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-25008
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was found in PX4 PX4-Autopilot up to 1.15.4. This issue affects the function MavlinkReceiver::handle_message_serial_control of the file src/modules/mavlink/mavlink_receiver.cpp of the component Mavlink Shell Closing Handler. The manipulation of the argument _mavlink_shell leads to use after free. An attack…
more
has to be approached locally. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The identifier of the patch is 4395d4f00c49b888f030f5b43e2a779f1fa78708. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Insufficient information to map techniques.CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires applying the vendor patch (4395d4f) that eliminates the use-after-free in handle_message_serial_control.
Implements memory protections that can block or contain exploitation of the CWE-416 use-after-free on _mavlink_shell.
Disables or restricts the Mavlink shell component whose serial-control handler contains the vulnerability, reducing attack surface.
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.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.