CVE-2025-38165
Linux Kernel 6.1.54 – 6.1.142
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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-2025-38165 is a high-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 22th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-19779
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf, sockmap: Fix panic when calling skb_linearize The panic can be reproduced by executing the command: ./bench sockmap -c 2 -p 1 -a --rx-verdict-ingress --rx-strp 100000 Then a kernel panic…
more
was captured: ''' [ 657.460555] kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:2178! [ 657.462680] Tainted: [W]=WARN [ 657.463287] Workqueue: events sk_psock_backlog ... [ 657.469610] <TASK> [ 657.469738] ? die+0x36/0x90 [ 657.469916] ? do_trap+0x1d0/0x270 [ 657.470118] ? pskb_expand_head+0x612/0xf40 [ 657.470376] ? pskb_expand_head+0x612/0xf40 [ 657.470620] ? do_error_trap+0xa3/0x170 [ 657.470846] ? pskb_expand_head+0x612/0xf40 [ 657.471092] ? handle_invalid_op+0x2c/0x40 [ 657.471335] ? pskb_expand_head+0x612/0xf40 [ 657.471579] ? exc_invalid_op+0x2d/0x40 [ 657.471805] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 [ 657.472052] ? pskb_expand_head+0xd1/0xf40 [ 657.472292] ? pskb_expand_head+0x612/0xf40 [ 657.472540] ? lock_acquire+0x18f/0x4e0 [ 657.472766] ? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x110 [ 657.472999] ? __pfx_pskb_expand_head+0x10/0x10 [ 657.473263] ? __kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x5b/0x470 [ 657.473537] ? __pfx___lock_release.isra.0+0x10/0x10 [ 657.473826] __pskb_pull_tail+0xfd/0x1d20 [ 657.474062] ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x4e/0x90 [ 657.474707] sk_psock_skb_ingress_enqueue+0x3bf/0x510 [ 657.475392] ? __kasan_kmalloc+0xaa/0xb0 [ 657.476010] sk_psock_backlog+0x5cf/0xd70 [ 657.476637] process_one_work+0x858/0x1a20 ''' The panic originates from the assertion BUG_ON(skb_shared(skb)) in skb_linearize(). A previous commit(see Fixes tag) introduced skb_get() to avoid race conditions between skb operations in the backlog and skb release in the recvmsg path. However, this caused the panic to always occur when skb_linearize is executed. The "--rx-strp 100000" parameter forces the RX path to use the strparser module which aggregates data until it reaches 100KB before calling sockmap logic. The 100KB payload exceeds MAX_MSG_FRAGS, triggering skb_linearize. To fix this issue, just move skb_get into sk_psock_skb_ingress_enqueue. ''' sk_psock_backlog: sk_psock_handle_skb skb_get(skb) <== we move it into 'sk_psock_skb_ingress_enqueue' sk_psock_skb_ingress____________ ↓ | | → sk_psock_skb_ingress_self | sk_psock_skb_ingress_enqueue sk_psock_verdict_apply_________________↑ skb_linearize ''' Note that for verdict_apply path, the skb_get operation is unnecessary so we add 'take_ref' param to control it's behavior.
- 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 (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.
Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.
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 enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.
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 unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.
Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.
Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.
Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.
Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.