Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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-2025-37920 is a high-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 4th 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 SC-39 (Process Isolation) and SC-4 (Information in Shared System Resources) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-15945
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xsk: Fix race condition in AF_XDP generic RX path Move rx_lock from xsk_socket to xsk_buff_pool. Fix synchronization for shared umem mode in generic RX path where multiple sockets share single…
more
xsk_buff_pool. RX queue is exclusive to xsk_socket, while FILL queue can be shared between multiple sockets. This could result in race condition where two CPU cores access RX path of two different sockets sharing the same umem. Protect both queues by acquiring spinlock in shared xsk_buff_pool. Lock contention may be minimized in the future by some per-thread FQ buffering. It's safe and necessary to move spin_lock_bh(rx_lock) after xsk_rcv_check(): * xs->pool and spinlock_init is synchronized by xsk_bind() -> xsk_is_bound() memory barriers. * xsk_rcv_check() may return true at the moment of xsk_release() or xsk_unbind_dev(), however this will not cause any data races or race conditions. xsk_unbind_dev() removes xdp socket from all maps and waits for completion of all outstanding rx operations. Packets in RX path will either complete safely or drop.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Maintaining separate execution domains for each process structurally eliminates unintended concurrent access to the same shared resources.
Preventing unintended information transfer through shared system resources directly addresses the improper concurrent modification that defines a race condition.
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 proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
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, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.