CVE-2025-38640 : Detail

CVE-2025-38640

7.8
/
High
0.02%V4
Local
2025-08-22
16h00 +00:00
2026-07-30
05h56 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

bpf: Disable migration in nf_hook_run_bpf().

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Disable migration in nf_hook_run_bpf(). syzbot reported that the netfilter bpf prog can be called without migration disabled in xmit path. Then the assertion in __bpf_prog_run() fails, triggering the splat below. [0] Let's use bpf_prog_run_pin_on_cpu() in nf_hook_run_bpf(). [0]: BUG: assuming non migratable context at ./include/linux/filter.h:703 in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 0, migration_disabled() 0 pid: 5829, name: sshd-session 3 locks held by sshd-session/5829: #0: ffff88807b4e4218 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1667 [inline] #0: ffff88807b4e4218 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: tcp_sendmsg+0x20/0x50 net/ipv4/tcp.c:1395 #1: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:331 [inline] #1: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_read_lock include/linux/rcupdate.h:841 [inline] #1: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: __ip_queue_xmit+0x69/0x26c0 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:470 #2: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:331 [inline] #2: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_read_lock include/linux/rcupdate.h:841 [inline] #2: ffffffff8e5c4e00 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: nf_hook+0xb2/0x680 include/linux/netfilter.h:241 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5829 Comm: sshd-session Not tainted 6.16.0-rc6-syzkaller-00002-g155a3c003e55 #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 05/07/2025 Call Trace: __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x16c/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120 __cant_migrate kernel/sched/core.c:8860 [inline] __cant_migrate+0x1c7/0x250 kernel/sched/core.c:8834 __bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:703 [inline] bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:725 [inline] nf_hook_run_bpf+0x83/0x1e0 net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c:20 nf_hook_entry_hookfn include/linux/netfilter.h:157 [inline] nf_hook_slow+0xbb/0x200 net/netfilter/core.c:623 nf_hook+0x370/0x680 include/linux/netfilter.h:272 NF_HOOK_COND include/linux/netfilter.h:305 [inline] ip_output+0x1bc/0x2a0 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:433 dst_output include/net/dst.h:459 [inline] ip_local_out net/ipv4/ip_output.c:129 [inline] __ip_queue_xmit+0x1d7d/0x26c0 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:527 __tcp_transmit_skb+0x2686/0x3e90 net/ipv4/tcp_output.c:1479 tcp_transmit_skb net/ipv4/tcp_output.c:1497 [inline] tcp_write_xmit+0x1274/0x84e0 net/ipv4/tcp_output.c:2838 __tcp_push_pending_frames+0xaf/0x390 net/ipv4/tcp_output.c:3021 tcp_push+0x225/0x700 net/ipv4/tcp.c:759 tcp_sendmsg_locked+0x1870/0x42b0 net/ipv4/tcp.c:1359 tcp_sendmsg+0x2e/0x50 net/ipv4/tcp.c:1396 inet_sendmsg+0xb9/0x140 net/ipv4/af_inet.c:851 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:712 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:727 [inline] sock_write_iter+0x4aa/0x5b0 net/socket.c:1131 new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:593 [inline] vfs_write+0x6c7/0x1150 fs/read_write.c:686 ksys_write+0x1f8/0x250 fs/read_write.c:738 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xcd/0x4c0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7fe7d365d407 Code: 48 89 fa 4c 89 df e8 38 aa 00 00 8b 93 08 03 00 00 59 5e 48 83 f8 fc 74 1a 5b c3 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 48 8b 44 24 10 0f 05 <5b> c3 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 83 e2 39 83 fa 08 75 de e8 23 ff ff ff RSP:

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.

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) 6.4 To (excluding) 6.6.102

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.42

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.15.10

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.16 To (excluding) 6.16.1

References