Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-37810 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 10th 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-16 (Memory Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-13978
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: dwc3: gadget: check that event count does not exceed event buffer length The event count is read from register DWC3_GEVNTCOUNT. There is a check for the count being zero,…
more
but not for exceeding the event buffer length. Check that event count does not exceed event buffer length, avoiding an out-of-bounds access when memcpy'ing the event. Crash log: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffffffc0129be000 pc : __memcpy+0x114/0x180 lr : dwc3_check_event_buf+0xec/0x348 x3 : 0000000000000030 x2 : 000000000000dfc4 x1 : ffffffc0129be000 x0 : ffffff87aad60080 Call trace: __memcpy+0x114/0x180 dwc3_interrupt+0x24/0x34
- 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 the event count read from DWC3_GEVNTCOUNT against buffer length before the memcpy, eliminating the out-of-bounds write.
Applies memory-protection mechanisms that can block or contain the kernel paging fault resulting from the unchecked event-buffer access.
Process isolation limits the blast radius of a kernel-level OOB write originating in the dwc3 gadget interrupt 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-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
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 and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.