CVE-2025-38684 : Detail

CVE-2025-38684

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.02%V4
Local
2025-09-04
15h32 +00:00
2026-05-12
12h05 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

net/sched: ets: use old 'nbands' while purging unused classes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: ets: use old 'nbands' while purging unused classes Shuang reported sch_ets test-case [1] crashing in ets_class_qlen_notify() after recent changes from Lion [2]. The problem is: in ets_qdisc_change() we purge unused DWRR queues; the value of 'q->nbands' is the new one, and the cleanup should be done with the old one. The problem is here since my first attempts to fix ets_qdisc_change(), but it surfaced again after the recent qdisc len accounting fixes. Fix it purging idle DWRR queues before assigning a new value of 'q->nbands', so that all purge operations find a consistent configuration: - old 'q->nbands' because it's needed by ets_class_find() - old 'q->nstrict' because it's needed by ets_class_is_strict() BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI CPU: 62 UID: 0 PID: 39457 Comm: tc Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.12.0-116.el10.x86_64 #1 PREEMPT(voluntary) Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R640/06DKY5, BIOS 2.12.2 07/09/2021 RIP: 0010:__list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x4/0x80 Code: ff 4c 39 c7 0f 84 39 19 8e ff b8 01 00 00 00 c3 cc cc cc cc 66 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 f3 0f 1e fa <48> 8b 17 48 8b 4f 08 48 85 d2 0f 84 56 19 8e ff 48 85 c9 0f 84 ab RSP: 0018:ffffba186009f400 EFLAGS: 00010202 RAX: 00000000000000d6 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000004 RDX: ffff9f0fa29b69c0 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: ffffffffc12c2400 R08: 0000000000000008 R09: 0000000000000004 R10: ffffffffffffffff R11: 0000000000000004 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: ffff9f0f8cfe0000 R14: 0000000000100005 R15: 0000000000000000 FS: 00007f2154f37480(0000) GS:ffff9f269c1c0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 00000001530be001 CR4: 00000000007726f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: ets_class_qlen_notify+0x65/0x90 [sch_ets] qdisc_tree_reduce_backlog+0x74/0x110 ets_qdisc_change+0x630/0xa40 [sch_ets] __tc_modify_qdisc.constprop.0+0x216/0x7f0 tc_modify_qdisc+0x7c/0x120 rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x145/0x3f0 netlink_rcv_skb+0x53/0x100 netlink_unicast+0x245/0x390 netlink_sendmsg+0x21b/0x470 ____sys_sendmsg+0x39d/0x3d0 ___sys_sendmsg+0x9a/0xe0 __sys_sendmsg+0x7a/0xd0 do_syscall_64+0x7d/0x160 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e RIP: 0033:0x7f2155114084 Code: 89 02 b8 ff ff ff ff eb bb 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 00 f3 0f 1e fa 80 3d 25 f0 0c 00 00 74 13 b8 2e 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 54 c3 0f 1f 00 48 83 ec 28 89 54 24 1c 48 89 RSP: 002b:00007fff1fd7a988 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000002e RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000560ec063e5e0 RCX: 00007f2155114084 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00007fff1fd7a9f0 RDI: 0000000000000003 RBP: 00007fff1fd7aa60 R08: 0000000000000010 R09: 000000000000003f R10: 0000560ee9b3a010 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 00007fff1fd7aae0 R13: 000000006891ccde R14: 0000560ec063e5e0 R15: 00007fff1fd7aad0 [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/e08c7f4a6882f260011909a868311c6e9b54f3e4.1639153474.git.dcaratti@redhat.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/d912cbd7-193b-4269-9857-525bee8bbb6a@gmail.com/

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-476 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

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) 5.4.296 To (excluding) 5.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.6 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) 6.6.103

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.43

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.15.11

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.16 To (excluding) 6.16.2

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 11.0

References