CVE-2025-21653:详情

CVE-2025-21653

5.5
/
中危
0.03%V4
2025-01-19
10h18 +00:00
Local
2026-05-12
12h03 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
随时了解指定 CVE 的变更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

net_sched: cls_flow: validate TCA_FLOW_RSHIFT attribute

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net_sched: cls_flow: validate TCA_FLOW_RSHIFT attribute syzbot found that TCA_FLOW_RSHIFT attribute was not validated. Right shitfing a 32bit integer is undefined for large shift values. UBSAN: shift-out-of-bounds in net/sched/cls_flow.c:329:23 shift exponent 9445 is too large for 32-bit type 'u32' (aka 'unsigned int') CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 54 Comm: kworker/u8:3 Not tainted 6.13.0-rc3-syzkaller-00180-g4f619d518db9 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/13/2024 Workqueue: ipv6_addrconf addrconf_dad_work Call Trace: __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:120 ubsan_epilogue lib/ubsan.c:231 [inline] __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0x3c8/0x420 lib/ubsan.c:468 flow_classify+0x24d5/0x25b0 net/sched/cls_flow.c:329 tc_classify include/net/tc_wrapper.h:197 [inline] __tcf_classify net/sched/cls_api.c:1771 [inline] tcf_classify+0x420/0x1160 net/sched/cls_api.c:1867 sfb_classify net/sched/sch_sfb.c:260 [inline] sfb_enqueue+0x3ad/0x18b0 net/sched/sch_sfb.c:318 dev_qdisc_enqueue+0x4b/0x290 net/core/dev.c:3793 __dev_xmit_skb net/core/dev.c:3889 [inline] __dev_queue_xmit+0xf0e/0x3f50 net/core/dev.c:4400 dev_queue_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:3168 [inline] neigh_hh_output include/net/neighbour.h:523 [inline] neigh_output include/net/neighbour.h:537 [inline] ip_finish_output2+0xd41/0x1390 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:236 iptunnel_xmit+0x55d/0x9b0 net/ipv4/ip_tunnel_core.c:82 udp_tunnel_xmit_skb+0x262/0x3b0 net/ipv4/udp_tunnel_core.c:173 geneve_xmit_skb drivers/net/geneve.c:916 [inline] geneve_xmit+0x21dc/0x2d00 drivers/net/geneve.c:1039 __netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:5002 [inline] netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:5011 [inline] xmit_one net/core/dev.c:3590 [inline] dev_hard_start_xmit+0x27a/0x7d0 net/core/dev.c:3606 __dev_queue_xmit+0x1b73/0x3f50 net/core/dev.c:4434

CVE 信息

相关弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名称 来源
CWE Other 暂无信息。

指标

指标 评分 严重程度 CVSS 向量 来源
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 是一种预测漏洞被利用可能性的评分模型。

EPSS 评分

EPSS 模型生成一个介于 0 到 1(即 0% 到 100%)之间的概率评分。评分越高,漏洞被利用的可能性越大。

EPSS 百分位

百分位用于根据 EPSS 评分对 CVE 进行排名。例如,EPSS 百分位为第 95 的 CVE,其被利用的可能性高于 95% 的其他 CVE。因此,百分位可用于比较不同 CVE 的 EPSS 评分。

相关产品

配置 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 2.6.25 至(不含) 5.4.290

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.5 至(不含) 5.10.234

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.11 至(不含) 5.15.177

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.16 至(不含) 6.1.125

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.2 至(不含) 6.6.72

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.7 至(不含) 6.12.10

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

参考资料