CVE-2025-22012
Linux Kernel 6.13 – 6.13.9
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-22012 is a high-severity Improper Locking (CWE-667) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 3th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-10333
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Revert "arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Affirm IDR0.CCTW on apps_smmu" There are reports that the pagetable walker cache coherency is not a given across the spectrum of SDM845/850 devices, leading to…
more
lock-ups and resets. It works fine on some devices (like the Dragonboard 845c, but not so much on the Lenovo Yoga C630). This unfortunately looks like a fluke in firmware development, where likely somewhere in the vast hypervisor stack, a change to accommodate for this was only introduced after the initial software release (which often serves as a baseline for products). Revert the change to avoid additional guesswork around crashes. This reverts commit 6b31a9744b8726c69bb0af290f8475a368a4b805.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
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.
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.
Security testing can detect race conditions and locking errors before release.
Secure development lifecycle includes concurrency and locking requirements that reduce improper locking defects.
Application security requirements can mandate proper lock acquisition/release patterns.
Secure architecture principles address thread-safety and resource synchronization.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit missing or incorrect lock usage.
Change management may catch locking issues introduced by modifications but does not prevent the weakness itself.