Vulnerability Database

373,546

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2025-38224 — linux / linux_kernel

Out-of-bounds Read

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

can: kvaser_pciefd: refine error prone echo_skb_max handling logic

echo_skb_max should define the supported upper limit of echo_skb[] allocated inside the netdevice's priv. The corresponding size value provided by this driver to alloc_candev() is KVASER_PCIEFD_CAN_TX_MAX_COUNT which is 17.

But later echo_skb_max is rounded up to the nearest power of two (for the max case, that would be 32) and the tx/ack indices calculated further during tx/rx may exceed the upper array boundary. Kasan reported this for the ack case inside kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet(), though the xmit function has actually caught the same thing earlier.

BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet+0x2d7/0x92a drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1528 Read of size 8 at addr ffff888105e4f078 by task swapper/4/0

CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/4 Not tainted 6.15.0 #12 PREEMPT(voluntary) Call Trace: <IRQ> dump_stack_lvl lib/dump_stack.c:122 print_report mm/kasan/report.c:521 kasan_report mm/kasan/report.c:634 kvaser_pciefd_handle_ack_packet drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1528 kvaser_pciefd_read_packet drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1605 kvaser_pciefd_read_buffer drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1656 kvaser_pciefd_receive_irq drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1684 kvaser_pciefd_irq_handler drivers/net/can/kvaser_pciefd.c:1733 __handle_irq_event_percpu kernel/irq/handle.c:158 handle_irq_event kernel/irq/handle.c:210 handle_edge_irq kernel/irq/chip.c:833 __common_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/irq.c:296 common_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/irq.c:286 </IRQ>

Tx max count definitely matters for kvaser_pciefd_tx_avail(), but for seq numbers' generation that's not the case - we're free to calculate them as would be more convenient, not taking tx max count into account. The only downside is that the size of echo_skb[] should correspond to the max seq number (not tx max count), so in some situations a bit more memory would be consumed than could be.

Thus make the size of the underlying echo_skb[] sufficient for the rounded max tx value.

Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.

  • Published: Jul 4, 2025
  • Updated: Nov 19, 2025
  • CVE: CVE-2025-38224
  • Severity: High
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 7.8
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.