CVE-2025-38147
CVE Descriptions
calipso: Don't call calipso functions for AF_INET sk.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: calipso: Don't call calipso functions for AF_INET sk. syzkaller reported a null-ptr-deref in txopt_get(). [0] The offset 0x70 was of struct ipv6_txoptions in struct ipv6_pinfo, so struct ipv6_pinfo was NULL there. However, this never happens for IPv6 sockets as inet_sk(sk)->pinet6 is always set in inet6_create(), meaning the socket was not IPv6 one. The root cause is missing validation in netlbl_conn_setattr(). netlbl_conn_setattr() switches branches based on struct sockaddr.sa_family, which is passed from userspace. However, netlbl_conn_setattr() does not check if the address family matches the socket. The syzkaller must have called connect() for an IPv6 address on an IPv4 socket. We have a proper validation in tcp_v[46]_connect(), but security_socket_connect() is called in the earlier stage. Let's copy the validation to netlbl_conn_setattr(). [0]: Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc000000000e: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN NOPTI KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000070-0x0000000000000077] CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 12928 Comm: syz.9.1677 Not tainted 6.12.0 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:txopt_get include/net/ipv6.h:390 [inline] RIP: 0010: Code: 02 00 00 49 8b ac 24 f8 02 00 00 e8 84 69 2a fd e8 ff 00 16 fd 48 8d 7d 70 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 53 02 00 00 48 8b 6d 70 48 85 ed 0f 84 ab 01 00 RSP: 0018:ffff88811b8afc48 EFLAGS: 00010212 RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 1ffff11023715f8a RCX: ffffffff841ab00c RDX: 000000000000000e RSI: ffffc90007d9e000 RDI: 0000000000000070 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: ffffed1023715f9d R09: ffffed1023715f9e R10: ffffed1023715f9d R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff888123075f00 R13: ffff88810245bd80 R14: ffff888113646780 R15: ffff888100578a80 FS: 00007f9019bd7640(0000) GS:ffff8882d2d00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f901b927bac CR3: 0000000104788003 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 PKRU: 80000000 Call Trace:CVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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) 4.8 To (excluding) 5.4.295
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.239
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.186
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.142
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 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
Configuraton 0
Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 11.0
