CVE-2025-38285 — linux / linux_kernel
Reachable AssertionIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Fix WARN() in get_bpf_raw_tp_regs
syzkaller reported an issue:
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 5971 at kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1861 get_bpf_raw_tp_regs+0xa4/0x100 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1861 Modules linked in: CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 5971 Comm: syz-executor205 Not tainted 6.15.0-rc5-syzkaller-00038-g707df3375124 #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:get_bpf_raw_tp_regs+0xa4/0x100 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1861 RSP: 0018:ffffc90003636fa8 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000003 RCX: ffffffff81c6bc4c RDX: ffff888032efc880 RSI: ffffffff81c6bc83 RDI: 0000000000000005 RBP: ffff88806a730860 R08: 0000000000000005 R09: 0000000000000003 R10: 0000000000000004 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000004 R13: 0000000000000001 R14: ffffc90003637008 R15: 0000000000000900 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8880d6cdf000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f7baee09130 CR3: 0000000029f5a000 CR4: 0000000000352ef0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> ____bpf_get_stack_raw_tp kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1934 [inline] bpf_get_stack_raw_tp+0x24/0x160 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1931 bpf_prog_ec3b2eefa702d8d3+0x43/0x47 bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:1316 [inline] __bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:718 [inline] bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:725 [inline] __bpf_trace_run kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2363 [inline] bpf_trace_run3+0x23f/0x5a0 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2405 __bpf_trace_mmap_lock_acquire_returned+0xfc/0x140 include/trace/events/mmap_lock.h:47 __traceiter_mmap_lock_acquire_returned+0x79/0xc0 include/trace/events/mmap_lock.h:47 __do_trace_mmap_lock_acquire_returned include/trace/events/mmap_lock.h:47 [inline] trace_mmap_lock_acquire_returned include/trace/events/mmap_lock.h:47 [inline] __mmap_lock_do_trace_acquire_returned+0x138/0x1f0 mm/mmap_lock.c:35 __mmap_lock_trace_acquire_returned include/linux/mmap_lock.h:36 [inline] mmap_read_trylock include/linux/mmap_lock.h:204 [inline] stack_map_get_build_id_offset+0x535/0x6f0 kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:157 __bpf_get_stack+0x307/0xa10 kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:483 ____bpf_get_stack kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:499 [inline] bpf_get_stack+0x32/0x40 kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:496 ____bpf_get_stack_raw_tp kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1941 [inline] bpf_get_stack_raw_tp+0x124/0x160 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:1931 bpf_prog_ec3b2eefa702d8d3+0x43/0x47
Tracepoint like trace_mmap_lock_acquire_returned may cause nested call as the corner case show above, which will be resolved with more general method in the future. As a result, WARN_ON_ONCE will be triggered. As Alexei suggested, remove the WARN_ON_ONCE first.
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 4.19.57 | 4.20 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.1.16 | 5.2 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.2.1 | 5.4.295 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.5 | 5.10.239 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.11 | 5.15.186 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.16 | 6.1.142 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.2 | 6.6.94 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.7 | 6.12.34 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.13 | 6.15.3 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.2 | 5.2.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.2-rc6 | 5.2-rc6.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.2-rc7 | 5.2-rc7.x |
| debian / debian_linux | 11.0 | 11.0.x |
- https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/html/ssa-082556.html
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/147ea936fc6fa8fe0c93f0df918803a5375ca535
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/18e8cbbae79cb35bdce8a01c889827b9799c762e
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3880cdbed1c4607e378f58fa924c5d6df900d1d3
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/44ebe361abb322d2afd77930fa767a99f271c4d1
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6d8f39875a10a194051c3eaefebc7ac06a34aaf3
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c98cdf6795a36bca163ebb40411fef1687b9eb13
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e167414beabb1e941fe563a96becc98627d5bdf6
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ee90be48edb3dac612e0b7f5332482a9e8be2696
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/10/msg00007.html
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/10/msg00008.html
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
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.