CVE-2025-38032 : Detail

CVE-2025-38032

5.5
/
Medium
0.07%V4
Local
2025-06-18
09h33 +00:00
2025-06-18
09h33 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

mr: consolidate the ipmr_can_free_table() checks.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mr: consolidate the ipmr_can_free_table() checks. Guoyu Yin reported a splat in the ipmr netns cleanup path: WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 14564 at net/ipv4/ipmr.c:440 ipmr_free_table net/ipv4/ipmr.c:440 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 14564 at net/ipv4/ipmr.c:440 ipmr_rules_exit+0x135/0x1c0 net/ipv4/ipmr.c:361 Modules linked in: CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 14564 Comm: syz.4.838 Not tainted 6.14.0 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Ubuntu 24.04 PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:ipmr_free_table net/ipv4/ipmr.c:440 [inline] RIP: 0010:ipmr_rules_exit+0x135/0x1c0 net/ipv4/ipmr.c:361 Code: ff df 48 c1 ea 03 80 3c 02 00 75 7d 48 c7 83 60 05 00 00 00 00 00 00 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e e9 71 67 7f 00 e8 4c 2d 8a fd 90 <0f> 0b 90 eb 93 e8 41 2d 8a fd 0f b6 2d 80 54 ea 01 31 ff 89 ee e8 RSP: 0018:ffff888109547c58 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff888108c12dc0 RCX: ffffffff83e09868 RDX: ffff8881022b3300 RSI: ffffffff83e098d4 RDI: 0000000000000005 RBP: ffff888104288000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffed10211825c9 R10: 0000000000000001 R11: ffff88801816c4a0 R12: 0000000000000001 R13: ffff888108c13320 R14: ffff888108c12dc0 R15: fffffbfff0b74058 FS: 00007f84f39316c0(0000) GS:ffff88811b100000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f84f3930f98 CR3: 0000000113b56000 CR4: 0000000000350ef0 Call Trace: ipmr_net_exit_batch+0x50/0x90 net/ipv4/ipmr.c:3160 ops_exit_list+0x10c/0x160 net/core/net_namespace.c:177 setup_net+0x47d/0x8e0 net/core/net_namespace.c:394 copy_net_ns+0x25d/0x410 net/core/net_namespace.c:516 create_new_namespaces+0x3f6/0xaf0 kernel/nsproxy.c:110 unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0xc3/0x180 kernel/nsproxy.c:228 ksys_unshare+0x78d/0x9a0 kernel/fork.c:3342 __do_sys_unshare kernel/fork.c:3413 [inline] __se_sys_unshare kernel/fork.c:3411 [inline] __x64_sys_unshare+0x31/0x40 kernel/fork.c:3411 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xa6/0x1a0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f84f532cc29 Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48 RSP: 002b:00007f84f3931038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000110 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f84f5615fa0 RCX: 00007f84f532cc29 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000040000400 RBP: 00007f84f53fba18 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007f84f5615fa0 R15: 00007fff51c5f328 The running kernel has CONFIG_IP_MROUTE_MULTIPLE_TABLES disabled, and the sanity check for such build is still too loose. Address the issue consolidating the relevant sanity check in a single helper regardless of the kernel configuration. Also share it between the ipv4 and ipv6 code.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE Other 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

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) 6.13.1 To (excluding) 6.14.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.15

References