Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-21767

Linux Kernel 5.10.50 – 5.10.235

Published
27 February 2025
Modified
12 May 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0016 6th percentile
Risk Priority 41 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-21767 is a medium-severity Improper Locking (CWE-667) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 6th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: clocksource: Use migrate_disable() to avoid calling get_random_u32() in atomic context The following bug report happened with a PREEMPT_RT kernel: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:48 in_atomic(): 1,…

more

irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 2012, name: kwatchdog preempt_count: 1, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0 get_random_u32+0x4f/0x110 clocksource_verify_choose_cpus+0xab/0x1a0 clocksource_verify_percpu.part.0+0x6b/0x330 clocksource_watchdog_kthread+0x193/0x1a0 It is due to the fact that clocksource_verify_choose_cpus() is invoked with preemption disabled. This function invokes get_random_u32() to obtain random numbers for choosing CPUs. The batched_entropy_32 local lock and/or the base_crng.lock spinlock in driver/char/random.c will be acquired during the call. In PREEMPT_RT kernel, they are both sleeping locks and so cannot be acquired in atomic context. Fix this problem by using migrate_disable() to allow smp_processor_id() to be reliably used without introducing atomic context. preempt_disable() is then called after clocksource_verify_choose_cpus() but before the clocksource measurement is being run to avoid introducing unexpected latency.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1548 Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may circumvent mechanisms designed to control privilege elevation to gain higher-level permissions.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-40969Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-43863Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-56743Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-35997Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-45924Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-53031Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-21944Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-57903Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-40972Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-35999Same product: Linux Linux Kernel

Affected Assets

linux
linux kernel
6.14 · 5.10.50 — 5.10.235 · 5.12.17 — 5.13 · 5.13.2 — 5.15.179

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly include code reviews, static analysis, and concurrency standards that prevent improper locking.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing can detect race conditions and locking errors before release.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes concurrency and locking requirements that reduce improper locking defects.

prevents

Application security requirements can mandate proper lock acquisition/release patterns.

prevents

Secure architecture principles address thread-safety and resource synchronization.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly prohibit missing or incorrect lock usage.

prevents

Change management may catch locking issues introduced by modifications but does not prevent the weakness itself.

References