Executive Summary

On January 3, 2026, the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) identifier CVE-2025-34775 was officially marked as REJECTED in the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). This informational update provides a look into the administrative processes that govern the CVE system. A 'REJECTED' status signifies that a CVE ID, which was reserved in anticipation of a vulnerability disclosure, was ultimately deemed invalid or unnecessary. This is a normal part of the CVE lifecycle and helps maintain the integrity of the vulnerability database by pruning unused or incorrect entries.

Understanding Rejected CVEs

The CVE program is a federated system of CVE Numbering Authorities (CNAs)—organizations authorized to assign CVE IDs for vulnerabilities within their specific scope. When a researcher finds a potential vulnerability, they report it to a CNA (such as a vendor like Microsoft, an open-source project, or a research organization), which then reserves a CVE ID for it.

However, a reserved ID does not always become a published vulnerability. A CVE may be rejected for several reasons:

• Duplicate: The reported issue is a duplicate of a vulnerability that already has a CVE ID assigned.
• Not a Vulnerability: Upon further review, the CNA determines that the reported behavior is not a security flaw (e.g., it is intended functionality or requires an impossible set of circumstances to exploit).
• Administrative Error: The ID was reserved by mistake.
• Withdrawn Submission: The researcher who reported the issue may withdraw their submission.

In the case of CVE-2025-34775, the official reason provided is that the ID was reserved but never used. The CNA responsible for this ID has effectively returned it to the pool, marking it as invalid to prevent any future confusion.

Impact Assessment

There is no security impact associated with a rejected CVE. These entries do not describe a flaw in any software and require no action from security teams, developers, or end-users. Their primary value is in providing transparency and a complete audit trail for the CVE system. By publicly marking an ID as rejected, the NVD and MITRE prevent that number from being used unofficially or maliciously in the future to refer to a non-existent vulnerability.

For security professionals, seeing a rejected CVE is a reminder that the vulnerability disclosure process has checks and balances. It shows that not every initial report translates into a confirmed flaw and highlights the administrative work that happens behind the scenes to keep the global vulnerability database accurate.

Conclusion

While a rejected CVE like CVE-2025-34775 may seem like non-news, it is a small but important part of the ecosystem that security professionals rely on. It demonstrates the CVE program's commitment to accuracy and provides a complete, albeit unexciting, record of the vulnerability management lifecycle. No patches, mitigations, or detections are required.