CVE-2025-21720 : Detail

CVE-2025-21720

7.5
/
High
Memory Corruption
0.02%V4
Network
2025-02-27
02h07 +00:00
2026-07-30
05h45 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

xfrm: delete intermediate secpath entry in packet offload mode

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: delete intermediate secpath entry in packet offload mode Packets handled by hardware have added secpath as a way to inform XFRM core code that this path was already handled. That secpath is not needed at all after policy is checked and it is removed later in the stack. However, in the case of IP forwarding is enabled (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward), that secpath is not removed and packets which already were handled are reentered to the driver TX path with xfrm_offload set. The following kernel panic is observed in mlx5 in such case: mlx5_core 0000:04:00.0 enp4s0f0np0: Link up mlx5_core 0000:04:00.1 enp4s0f1np1: Link up Initializing XFRM netlink socket IPsec XFRM device driver BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 #PF: supervisor instruction fetch in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0010) - not-present page PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: Oops: 0010 [#1] PREEMPT SMP CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.13.0-rc1-alex #3 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-1ubuntu1.1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:0x0 Code: Unable to access opcode bytes at 0xffffffffffffffd6. RSP: 0018:ffffb87380003800 EFLAGS: 00010206 RAX: ffff8df004e02600 RBX: ffffb873800038d8 RCX: 00000000ffff98cf RDX: ffff8df00733e108 RSI: ffff8df00521fb80 RDI: ffff8df001661f00 RBP: ffffb87380003850 R08: ffff8df013980000 R09: 0000000000000010 R10: 0000000000000002 R11: 0000000000000002 R12: ffff8df001661f00 R13: ffff8df00521fb80 R14: ffff8df00733e108 R15: ffff8df011faf04e FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8df46b800000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: ffffffffffffffd6 CR3: 0000000106384000 CR4: 0000000000350ef0 Call Trace: ? show_regs+0x63/0x70 ? __die_body+0x20/0x60 ? __die+0x2b/0x40 ? page_fault_oops+0x15c/0x550 ? do_user_addr_fault+0x3ed/0x870 ? exc_page_fault+0x7f/0x190 ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x27/0x30 mlx5e_ipsec_handle_tx_skb+0xe7/0x2f0 [mlx5_core] mlx5e_xmit+0x58e/0x1980 [mlx5_core] ? __fib_lookup+0x6a/0xb0 dev_hard_start_xmit+0x82/0x1d0 sch_direct_xmit+0xfe/0x390 __dev_queue_xmit+0x6d8/0xee0 ? __fib_lookup+0x6a/0xb0 ? internal_add_timer+0x48/0x70 ? mod_timer+0xe2/0x2b0 neigh_resolve_output+0x115/0x1b0 __neigh_update+0x26a/0xc50 neigh_update+0x14/0x20 arp_process+0x2cb/0x8e0 ? __napi_build_skb+0x5e/0x70 arp_rcv+0x11e/0x1c0 ? dev_gro_receive+0x574/0x820 __netif_receive_skb_list_core+0x1cf/0x1f0 netif_receive_skb_list_internal+0x183/0x2a0 napi_complete_done+0x76/0x1c0 mlx5e_napi_poll+0x234/0x7a0 [mlx5_core] __napi_poll+0x2d/0x1f0 net_rx_action+0x1a6/0x370 ? atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x3b/0x50 ? irq_int_handler+0x15/0x20 [mlx5_core] handle_softirqs+0xb9/0x2f0 ? handle_irq_event+0x44/0x60 irq_exit_rcu+0xdb/0x100 common_interrupt+0x98/0xc0 asm_common_interrupt+0x27/0x40 RIP: 0010:pv_native_safe_halt+0xb/0x10 Code: 09 c3 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 66 90 0f 22 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 eb 07 0f 00 2d 7f e9 36 00 fb 40 00 83 ff 07 77 21 89 ff ff 24 fd 88 3d a1 bd 0f 21 f8 RSP: 0018:ffffffffbe603de8 EFLAGS: 00000202 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000f92f46680 RDX: 0000000000000037 RSI: 00000000ffffffff RDI: 00000000000518d4 RBP: ffffffffbe603df0 R08: 000000cd42e4dffb R09: ffffffffbe603d70 R10: 0000004d80d62680 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: ffffffffbe60bf40 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffffffffbe60aff8 ? default_idle+0x9/0x20 arch_cpu_idle+0x9/0x10 default_idle_call+0x29/0xf0 do_idle+0x1f2/0x240 cpu_startup_entry+0x2c/0x30 rest_init+0xe7/0x100 start_kernel+0x76b/0xb90 x86_64_start_reservations+0x18/0x30 x86_64_start_kernel+0xc0/0x110 ? setup_ghcb+0xe/0x130 common_startup_64+0x13e/0x141 Modules linked in: esp4_offload esp4 xfrm_interface xfrm6_tunnel tunnel4 tunnel6 xfrm_user xfrm_algo binf ---truncated---

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-476 NULL Pointer Dereference
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.5 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.76

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.13.2

References