Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-38482 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 6th 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 AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-22881
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: comedi: das6402: Fix bit shift out of bounds When checking for a supported IRQ number, the following test is used: /* IRQs 2,3,5,6,7, 10,11,15 are valid for "enhanced" mode */…
more
if ((1 << it->options[1]) & 0x8cec) { However, `it->options[i]` is an unchecked `int` value from userspace, so the shift amount could be negative or out of bounds. Fix the test by requiring `it->options[1]` to be within bounds before proceeding with the original test. Valid `it->options[1]` values that select the IRQ will be in the range [1,15]. The value 0 explicitly disables the use of interrupts.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires validation of untrusted userspace values (it->options[1]) before they are used as a shift amount, directly preventing the out-of-bounds shift.
Memory protection mechanisms limit the impact of any resulting out-of-bounds read caused by an invalid shift.
Least-privilege restrictions on access to the comedi device reduce the set of users who can supply the malicious options array.
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 such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.