CVE-2025-37878
Linux Kernel ≤ 6.6.89
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). EPSS scores by FIRST (EPSS SIG), generated by Empirical Security. Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-37878 is a medium-severity Reachable Assertion (CWE-617) vulnerability in Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Defense Impairment (T1687); ranked at the 20th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-14112
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Fix WARN_ON(!ctx) in __free_event() for partial init Move the get_ctx(child_ctx) call and the child_event->ctx assignment to occur immediately after the child event is allocated. Ensure that child_event->ctx is non-NULL…
more
before any subsequent error path within inherit_event calls free_event(), satisfying the assumptions of the cleanup code. Details: There's no clear Fixes tag, because this bug is a side-effect of multiple interacting commits over time (up to 15 years old), not a single regression. The code initially incremented refcount then assigned context immediately after the child_event was created. Later, an early validity check for child_event was added before the refcount/assignment. Even later, a WARN_ON_ONCE() cleanup check was added, assuming event->ctx is valid if the pmu_ctx is valid. The problem is that the WARN_ON_ONCE() could trigger after the initial check passed but before child_event->ctx was assigned, violating its precondition. The solution is to assign child_event->ctx right after its initial validation. This ensures the context exists for any subsequent checks or cleanup routines, resolving the WARN_ON_ONCE(). To resolve it, defer the refcount update and child_event->ctx assignment directly after child_event->pmu_ctx is set but before checking if the parent event is orphaned. The cleanup routine depends on event->pmu_ctx being non-NULL before it verifies event->ctx is non-NULL. This also maintains the author's original intent of passing in child_ctx to find_get_pmu_context before its refcount/assignment. [ mingo: Expanded the changelog from another email by Gabriel Shahrouzi. ]
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds reachable assertions during development.
Security engineering principles discourage use of assertions for handling untrusted input.
Validating untrusted inputs structurally prevents attacker data from reaching and triggering assertions.
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 prevent unsafe assertions from being coded in reachable paths.
Runtime monitoring of software can detect assertion-triggered crashes as adverse events.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record reachable-assertion flaws before deployment.
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 reachable assertions before release, reducing the likelihood of exploitation.
Secure coding standards explicitly ban the use of assert() or equivalent statements that can be triggered by external input.