CVE-2025-71093 : Detail

CVE-2025-71093

9.1
/
Critical
Overflow
0.01%V4
Network
2026-01-13
15h34 +00:00
2026-07-30
06h05 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

e1000: fix OOB in e1000_tbi_should_accept()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: e1000: fix OOB in e1000_tbi_should_accept() In e1000_tbi_should_accept() we read the last byte of the frame via 'data[length - 1]' to evaluate the TBI workaround. If the descriptor- reported length is zero or larger than the actual RX buffer size, this read goes out of bounds and can hit unrelated slab objects. The issue is observed from the NAPI receive path (e1000_clean_rx_irq): ================================================================== BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in e1000_tbi_should_accept+0x610/0x790 Read of size 1 at addr ffff888014114e54 by task sshd/363 CPU: 0 PID: 363 Comm: sshd Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.12.0-59-gc9ba5276e321-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x5a/0x74 print_address_description+0x7b/0x440 print_report+0x101/0x200 kasan_report+0xc1/0xf0 e1000_tbi_should_accept+0x610/0x790 e1000_clean_rx_irq+0xa8c/0x1110 e1000_clean+0xde2/0x3c10 __napi_poll+0x98/0x380 net_rx_action+0x491/0xa20 __do_softirq+0x2c9/0x61d do_softirq+0xd1/0x120 __local_bh_enable_ip+0xfe/0x130 ip_finish_output2+0x7d5/0xb00 __ip_queue_xmit+0xe24/0x1ab0 __tcp_transmit_skb+0x1bcb/0x3340 tcp_write_xmit+0x175d/0x6bd0 __tcp_push_pending_frames+0x7b/0x280 tcp_sendmsg_locked+0x2e4f/0x32d0 tcp_sendmsg+0x24/0x40 sock_write_iter+0x322/0x430 vfs_write+0x56c/0xa60 ksys_write+0xd1/0x190 do_syscall_64+0x43/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae RIP: 0033:0x7f511b476b10 Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 88 d3 2b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 83 3d f9 2b 2c 00 00 75 10 b8 01 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 31 c3 48 83 ec 08 e8 8e 9b 01 00 48 89 04 24 RSP: 002b:00007ffc9211d4e8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000004024 RCX: 00007f511b476b10 RDX: 0000000000004024 RSI: 0000559a9385962c RDI: 0000000000000003 RBP: 0000559a9383a400 R08: fffffffffffffff0 R09: 0000000000004f00 R10: 0000000000000070 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 00007ffc9211d57f R14: 0000559a9347bde7 R15: 0000000000000003 Allocated by task 1: __kasan_krealloc+0x131/0x1c0 krealloc+0x90/0xc0 add_sysfs_param+0xcb/0x8a0 kernel_add_sysfs_param+0x81/0xd4 param_sysfs_builtin+0x138/0x1a6 param_sysfs_init+0x57/0x5b do_one_initcall+0x104/0x250 do_initcall_level+0x102/0x132 do_initcalls+0x46/0x74 kernel_init_freeable+0x28f/0x393 kernel_init+0x14/0x1a0 ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 The buggy address belongs to the object at ffff888014114000 which belongs to the cache kmalloc-2k of size 2048 The buggy address is located 1620 bytes to the right of 2048-byte region [ffff888014114000, ffff888014114800] The buggy address belongs to the physical page: page:ffffea0000504400 refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x14110 head:ffffea0000504400 order:3 compound_mapcount:0 compound_pincount:0 flags: 0x100000000010200(slab|head|node=0|zone=1) raw: 0100000000010200 0000000000000000 dead000000000001 ffff888013442000 raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000080008 00000001ffffffff 0000000000000000 page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected ================================================================== This happens because the TBI check unconditionally dereferences the last byte without validating the reported length first: u8 last_byte = *(data + length - 1); Fix by rejecting the frame early if the length is zero, or if it exceeds adapter->rx_buffer_len. This preserves the TBI workaround semantics for valid frames and prevents touching memory beyond the RX buffer.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-125 Out-of-bounds Read
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 9.1 CRITICAL CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

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.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

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.

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.

V3.1 7.1 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.

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.

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) 3.18.1 To (excluding) 5.10.248

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.198

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.160

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.120

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.64

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.18.4

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 3.18

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

References