CVE-2025-38233 : Detail

CVE-2025-38233

7.8
/
High
0.08%V4
Local
2025-07-04
13h37 +00:00
2026-07-30
05h52 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

powerpc64/ftrace: fix clobbered r15 during livepatching

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: powerpc64/ftrace: fix clobbered r15 during livepatching While r15 is clobbered always with PPC_FTRACE_OUT_OF_LINE, it is not restored in livepatch sequence leading to not so obvious fails like below: BUG: Unable to handle kernel data access on write at 0xc0000000000f9078 Faulting instruction address: 0xc0000000018ff958 Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] ... NIP: c0000000018ff958 LR: c0000000018ff930 CTR: c0000000009c0790 REGS: c00000005f2e7790 TRAP: 0300 Tainted: G K (6.14.0+) MSR: 8000000000009033 CR: 2822880b XER: 20040000 CFAR: c0000000008addc0 DAR: c0000000000f9078 DSISR: 0a000000 IRQMASK: 1 GPR00: c0000000018f2584 c00000005f2e7a30 c00000000280a900 c000000017ffa488 GPR04: 0000000000000008 0000000000000000 c0000000018f24fc 000000000000000d GPR08: fffffffffffe0000 000000000000000d 0000000000000000 0000000000008000 GPR12: c0000000009c0790 c000000017ffa480 c00000005f2e7c78 c0000000000f9070 GPR16: c00000005f2e7c90 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 GPR20: 0000000000000000 c00000005f3efa80 c00000005f2e7c60 c00000005f2e7c88 GPR24: c00000005f2e7c60 0000000000000001 c0000000000f9078 0000000000000000 GPR28: 00007fff97960000 c000000017ffa480 0000000000000000 c0000000000f9078 ... Call Trace: check_heap_object+0x34/0x390 (unreliable) __mutex_unlock_slowpath.isra.0+0xe4/0x230 seq_read_iter+0x430/0xa90 proc_reg_read_iter+0xa4/0x200 vfs_read+0x41c/0x510 ksys_read+0xa4/0x190 system_call_exception+0x1d0/0x440 system_call_vectored_common+0x15c/0x2ec Fix it by restoring r15 always.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE Other No informations.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

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

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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.

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 To (excluding) 6.15.4

References