Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-38530 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 7th 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 SI-16 (Memory Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-26111
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: comedi: pcl812: Fix bit shift out of bounds When checking for a supported IRQ number, the following test is used: if ((1 << it->options[1]) & board->irq_bits) { However, `it->options[i]` is…
more
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
Directly requires validation of untrusted userspace values (it->options[1]) before arithmetic operations such as the unchecked bit shift that triggers the out-of-bounds condition.
Memory-protection mechanisms can detect or block the effects of an out-of-bounds shift/read that results from the invalid IRQ option value.
Process isolation limits the blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds read in a kernel driver to the affected process context.
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.