GPU Display Drivers: Improper Validation of Array Index
CVE-2025-23278 is a high-severity improper validation of array index vulnerability in GPU Display Drivers from NVIDIA, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. Affected GPU Display Drivers versions: R575. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.2% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of GPU Display Drivers you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA | GPU Display Drivers | R575 | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (nvidia.com).
Official description
NVIDIA Display Driver for Windows and Linux contains a vulnerability where an attacker might cause an improper index validation by issuing a call with crafted parameters. A successful exploit of this vulnerability might lead to data tampering or denial of service.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Validation of Array Index
The product uses untrusted input when calculating or using an array index, but the product does not validate or incorrectly validates the index to ensure the index references a valid position within the array.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, Ada allows the programmer to constrain the values of a variable and languages such as Java and Ruby will allow the programmer to handle exceptions when an out-of-bounds index is accessed.
- Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment. For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND.
More Improper Validation of Array Index vulnerabilities (CWE-129)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Other vulnerabilities in GPU Display Drivers
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.0 High severity
- 7.0 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Recent Improper Validation of Array Index vulnerabilities
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.