Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-4598

Race Condition in Systemd Project Systemd ≤ 252.37

Public PoCRace Condition
Published
30 May 2025
Modified
30 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 4.7
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0075 52th percentile
Risk Priority 39 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-4598 is a medium-severity Signal Handler Race Condition (CWE-364) vulnerability in Systemd Project Systemd. Its CVSS base score is 4.7 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability was found in systemd-coredump. This flaw allows an attacker to force a SUID process to crash and replace it with a non-SUID binary to access the original's privileged process coredump, allowing the attacker to read sensitive data, such…

more

as /etc/shadow content, loaded by the original process. A SUID binary or process has a special type of permission, which allows the process to run with the file owner's permissions, regardless of the user executing the binary. This allows the process to access more restricted data than unprivileged users or processes would be able to. An attacker can leverage this flaw by forcing a SUID process to crash and force the Linux kernel to recycle the process PID before systemd-coredump can analyze the /proc/pid/auxv file. If the attacker wins the race condition, they gain access to the original's SUID process coredump file. They can read sensitive content loaded into memory by the original binary, affecting data confidentiality.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-42756Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26861Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26897Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2023-33203Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52489Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26960Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26698Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26671Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-27030Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26984Same product: Debian Debian Linux

Affected Assets

systemd project
systemd
≤ 252.37 · 253 — 253.32 · 254 — 254.25
redhat
openshift container platform
4.0
redhat
enterprise linux
10.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0
debian
debian linux
11.0, 12.0
oracle
linux
8, 9
linux
linux kernel
≤ 6.16

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (including concurrency and fuzz testing) can discover signal-handler race conditions before deployment.

Engineering principles such as least privilege, complete mediation, and avoidance of shared mutable state in handlers directly reduce introduction of signal-handler race conditions.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly prevent introduction of signal-handler race conditions during coding and review.

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.

finds

Security testing can detect signal-handler race conditions before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC practices can require avoidance of unsafe signal handling patterns.

degrades

Secure architecture principles can mandate safe concurrency and signal design.

prevents

Secure coding standards directly prohibit race-prone signal handlers.

mitigates

Change management may catch unsafe signal code during reviews but does not address the weakness itself.

References