CVE-2025-38117 : Detail

CVE-2025-38117

7.8
/
High
Memory Corruption
0.07%V4
Local
2025-07-03
08h35 +00:00
2026-08-23
12h45 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Bluetooth: MGMT: Protect mgmt_pending list with its own lock

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: MGMT: Protect mgmt_pending list with its own lock This uses a mutex to protect from concurrent access of mgmt_pending list which can cause crashes like: ================================================================== BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in hci_sock_get_channel+0x60/0x68 net/bluetooth/hci_sock.c:91 Read of size 2 at addr ffff0000c48885b2 by task syz.4.334/7318 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 7318 Comm: syz.4.334 Not tainted 6.15.0-rc7-syzkaller-g187899f4124a #0 PREEMPT Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 02/12/2025 Call trace: show_stack+0x2c/0x3c arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c:466 (C) __dump_stack+0x30/0x40 lib/dump_stack.c:94 dump_stack_lvl+0xd8/0x12c lib/dump_stack.c:120 print_address_description+0xa8/0x254 mm/kasan/report.c:408 print_report+0x68/0x84 mm/kasan/report.c:521 kasan_report+0xb0/0x110 mm/kasan/report.c:634 __asan_report_load2_noabort+0x20/0x2c mm/kasan/report_generic.c:379 hci_sock_get_channel+0x60/0x68 net/bluetooth/hci_sock.c:91 mgmt_pending_find+0x7c/0x140 net/bluetooth/mgmt_util.c:223 pending_find net/bluetooth/mgmt.c:947 [inline] remove_adv_monitor+0x44/0x1a4 net/bluetooth/mgmt.c:5445 hci_mgmt_cmd+0x780/0xc00 net/bluetooth/hci_sock.c:1712 hci_sock_sendmsg+0x544/0xbb0 net/bluetooth/hci_sock.c:1832 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:712 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:727 [inline] sock_write_iter+0x25c/0x378 net/socket.c:1131 new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:591 [inline] vfs_write+0x62c/0x97c fs/read_write.c:684 ksys_write+0x120/0x210 fs/read_write.c:736 __do_sys_write fs/read_write.c:747 [inline] __se_sys_write fs/read_write.c:744 [inline] __arm64_sys_write+0x7c/0x90 fs/read_write.c:744 __invoke_syscall arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:35 [inline] invoke_syscall+0x98/0x2b8 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:49 el0_svc_common+0x130/0x23c arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:132 do_el0_svc+0x48/0x58 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:151 el0_svc+0x58/0x17c arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:767 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x78/0x108 arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:786 el0t_64_sync+0x198/0x19c arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:600 Allocated by task 7037: kasan_save_stack mm/kasan/common.c:47 [inline] kasan_save_track+0x40/0x78 mm/kasan/common.c:68 kasan_save_alloc_info+0x44/0x54 mm/kasan/generic.c:562 poison_kmalloc_redzone mm/kasan/common.c:377 [inline] __kasan_kmalloc+0x9c/0xb4 mm/kasan/common.c:394 kasan_kmalloc include/linux/kasan.h:260 [inline] __do_kmalloc_node mm/slub.c:4327 [inline] __kmalloc_noprof+0x2fc/0x4c8 mm/slub.c:4339 kmalloc_noprof include/linux/slab.h:909 [inline] sk_prot_alloc+0xc4/0x1f0 net/core/sock.c:2198 sk_alloc+0x44/0x3ac net/core/sock.c:2254 bt_sock_alloc+0x4c/0x300 net/bluetooth/af_bluetooth.c:148 hci_sock_create+0xa8/0x194 net/bluetooth/hci_sock.c:2202 bt_sock_create+0x14c/0x24c net/bluetooth/af_bluetooth.c:132 __sock_create+0x43c/0x91c net/socket.c:1541 sock_create net/socket.c:1599 [inline] __sys_socket_create net/socket.c:1636 [inline] __sys_socket+0xd4/0x1c0 net/socket.c:1683 __do_sys_socket net/socket.c:1697 [inline] __se_sys_socket net/socket.c:1695 [inline] __arm64_sys_socket+0x7c/0x94 net/socket.c:1695 __invoke_syscall arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:35 [inline] invoke_syscall+0x98/0x2b8 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:49 el0_svc_common+0x130/0x23c arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:132 do_el0_svc+0x48/0x58 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:151 el0_svc+0x58/0x17c arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:767 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x78/0x108 arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:786 el0t_64_sync+0x198/0x19c arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:600 Freed by task 6607: kasan_save_stack mm/kasan/common.c:47 [inline] kasan_save_track+0x40/0x78 mm/kasan/common.c:68 kasan_save_free_info+0x58/0x70 mm/kasan/generic.c:576 poison_slab_object mm/kasan/common.c:247 [inline] __kasan_slab_free+0x68/0x88 mm/kasan/common.c:264 kasan_slab_free include/linux/kasan.h:233 [inline ---truncated---

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-416 Use After Free
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.

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) 4.1 To (excluding) 6.6.94

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.34

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.15.3

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.16

References