CVE-2025-21806
CVE Descriptions
net: let net.core.dev_weight always be non-zero
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: let net.core.dev_weight always be non-zero The following problem was encountered during stability test: (NULL net_device): NAPI poll function process_backlog+0x0/0x530 \ returned 1, exceeding its budget of 0. ------------[ cut here ]------------ list_add double add: new=ffff88905f746f48, prev=ffff88905f746f48, \ next=ffff88905f746e40. WARNING: CPU: 18 PID: 5462 at lib/list_debug.c:35 \ __list_add_valid_or_report+0xf3/0x130 CPU: 18 UID: 0 PID: 5462 Comm: ping Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.13.0-rc7+ RIP: 0010:__list_add_valid_or_report+0xf3/0x130 Call Trace: ? __warn+0xcd/0x250 ? __list_add_valid_or_report+0xf3/0x130 enqueue_to_backlog+0x923/0x1070 netif_rx_internal+0x92/0x2b0 __netif_rx+0x15/0x170 loopback_xmit+0x2ef/0x450 dev_hard_start_xmit+0x103/0x490 __dev_queue_xmit+0xeac/0x1950 ip_finish_output2+0x6cc/0x1620 ip_output+0x161/0x270 ip_push_pending_frames+0x155/0x1a0 raw_sendmsg+0xe13/0x1550 __sys_sendto+0x3bf/0x4e0 __x64_sys_sendto+0xdc/0x1b0 do_syscall_64+0x5b/0x170 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e The reproduction command is as follows: sysctl -w net.core.dev_weight=0 ping 127.0.0.1 This is because when the napi's weight is set to 0, process_backlog() may return 0 and clear the NAPI_STATE_SCHED bit of napi->state, causing this napi to be re-polled in net_rx_action() until __do_softirq() times out. Since the NAPI_STATE_SCHED bit has been cleared, napi_schedule_rps() can be retriggered in enqueue_to_backlog(), causing this issue. Making the napi's weight always non-zero solves this problem. Triggering this issue requires system-wide admin (setting is not namespaced).CVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| No informations. |
Metrics
| Metrics | Score | Severity | CVSS Vector | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
More informations
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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 Score
EPSS Percentile
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 2.6.13 To (excluding) 5.4.291
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.235
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.179
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.129
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
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 2.6.12
