Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-21964 is a medium-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 8th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-9356
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cifs: Fix integer overflow while processing acregmax mount option User-provided mount parameter acregmax of type u32 is intended to have an upper limit, but before it is validated, the value…
more
is converted from seconds to jiffies which can lead to an integer overflow. Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires validation of user-supplied mount parameters (acregmax) before arithmetic conversion to block the integer overflow.
Mandates timely application of the kernel patch that moves validation before the seconds-to-jiffies conversion.
Enforces secure baseline settings that can restrict or sanitize acregmax and other CIFS mount options to avoid the vulnerable code path.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.
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.
Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.