CVE-2025-38347 : Detail

CVE-2025-38347

5.5
/
Medium
0.11%V4
Local
2025-07-10
08h15 +00:00
2026-05-12
12h04 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

f2fs: fix to do sanity check on ino and xnid

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on ino and xnid syzbot reported a f2fs bug as below: INFO: task syz-executor140:5308 blocked for more than 143 seconds. Not tainted 6.14.0-rc7-syzkaller-00069-g81e4f8d68c66 #0 "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. task:syz-executor140 state:D stack:24016 pid:5308 tgid:5308 ppid:5306 task_flags:0x400140 flags:0x00000006 Call Trace: context_switch kernel/sched/core.c:5378 [inline] __schedule+0x190e/0x4c90 kernel/sched/core.c:6765 __schedule_loop kernel/sched/core.c:6842 [inline] schedule+0x14b/0x320 kernel/sched/core.c:6857 io_schedule+0x8d/0x110 kernel/sched/core.c:7690 folio_wait_bit_common+0x839/0xee0 mm/filemap.c:1317 __folio_lock mm/filemap.c:1664 [inline] folio_lock include/linux/pagemap.h:1163 [inline] __filemap_get_folio+0x147/0xb40 mm/filemap.c:1917 pagecache_get_page+0x2c/0x130 mm/folio-compat.c:87 find_get_page_flags include/linux/pagemap.h:842 [inline] f2fs_grab_cache_page+0x2b/0x320 fs/f2fs/f2fs.h:2776 __get_node_page+0x131/0x11b0 fs/f2fs/node.c:1463 read_xattr_block+0xfb/0x190 fs/f2fs/xattr.c:306 lookup_all_xattrs fs/f2fs/xattr.c:355 [inline] f2fs_getxattr+0x676/0xf70 fs/f2fs/xattr.c:533 __f2fs_get_acl+0x52/0x870 fs/f2fs/acl.c:179 f2fs_acl_create fs/f2fs/acl.c:375 [inline] f2fs_init_acl+0xd7/0x9b0 fs/f2fs/acl.c:418 f2fs_init_inode_metadata+0xa0f/0x1050 fs/f2fs/dir.c:539 f2fs_add_inline_entry+0x448/0x860 fs/f2fs/inline.c:666 f2fs_add_dentry+0xba/0x1e0 fs/f2fs/dir.c:765 f2fs_do_add_link+0x28c/0x3a0 fs/f2fs/dir.c:808 f2fs_add_link fs/f2fs/f2fs.h:3616 [inline] f2fs_mknod+0x2e8/0x5b0 fs/f2fs/namei.c:766 vfs_mknod+0x36d/0x3b0 fs/namei.c:4191 unix_bind_bsd net/unix/af_unix.c:1286 [inline] unix_bind+0x563/0xe30 net/unix/af_unix.c:1379 __sys_bind_socket net/socket.c:1817 [inline] __sys_bind+0x1e4/0x290 net/socket.c:1848 __do_sys_bind net/socket.c:1853 [inline] __se_sys_bind net/socket.c:1851 [inline] __x64_sys_bind+0x7a/0x90 net/socket.c:1851 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f Let's dump and check metadata of corrupted inode, it shows its xattr_nid is the same to its i_ino. dump.f2fs -i 3 chaseyu.img.raw i_xattr_nid [0x 3 : 3] So that, during mknod in the corrupted directory, it tries to get and lock inode page twice, result in deadlock. - f2fs_mknod - f2fs_add_inline_entry - f2fs_get_inode_page --- lock dir's inode page - f2fs_init_acl - f2fs_acl_create(dir,..) - __f2fs_get_acl - f2fs_getxattr - lookup_all_xattrs - __get_node_page --- try to lock dir's inode page In order to fix this, let's add sanity check on ino and xnid.

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) 3.8 To (excluding) 5.4.297

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.241

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.190

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.149

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.95

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.35

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.15.4

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 11.0

References