CVE-2025-37969
Linux Kernel 4.20 – 5.4.294
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-37969 is a medium-severity Improper Locking (CWE-667) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 3th 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-2 (Flaw Remediation) and SI-11 (Error Handling) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-15858
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iio: imu: st_lsm6dsx: fix possible lockup in st_lsm6dsx_read_tagged_fifo Prevent st_lsm6dsx_read_tagged_fifo from falling in an infinite loop in case pattern_len is equal to zero and the device FIFO is not empty.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires applying the kernel patch that adds the pattern_len != 0 guard, eliminating the infinite loop in st_lsm6dsx_read_tagged_fifo.
Mandates fail-safe behavior so that a zero-length FIFO pattern condition cannot cause an unrecoverable driver lockup.
Requires explicit error handling for invalid internal state (pattern_len == 0), preventing silent entry into the unbounded loop.
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.