CVE-2025-21688 Detail

CVE-2025-21688

Score / Severity

4.7

Medium

EPSS

0.04%V3

Vector

Local

Published

2025-02-10
15h58 +00:00

Modified

2025-03-24
15h38 +00:00

Official links

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Notifications manage

List of Notifications

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Criteria applied when sending the alert: compared with the last alert sent + differences in CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Parameters

You can specify a title that will be retrieved in the alerts that will be sent out.

Specified here a CVE ID as CVE-2025-1234

Planning

Month

Next run calculation

Day

Weekday

Hour

Minute

Creation date

Last execution

Next execution

Functionality requiring a connection

This feature, which allows you to receive alerts, is only active when you are logged into your account.

CVE Descriptions

drm/v3d: Assign job pointer to NULL before signaling the fence

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/v3d: Assign job pointer to NULL before signaling the fence In commit e4b5ccd392b9 ("drm/v3d: Ensure job pointer is set to NULL after job completion"), we introduced a change to assign the job pointer to NULL after completing a job, indicating job completion. However, this approach created a race condition between the DRM scheduler workqueue and the IRQ execution thread. As soon as the fence is signaled in the IRQ execution thread, a new job starts to be executed. This results in a race condition where the IRQ execution thread sets the job pointer to NULL simultaneously as the `run_job()` function assigns a new job to the pointer. This race condition can lead to a NULL pointer dereference if the IRQ execution thread sets the job pointer to NULL after `run_job()` assigns it to the new job. When the new job completes and the GPU emits an interrupt, `v3d_irq()` is triggered, potentially causing a crash. [ 466.310099] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000000000c0 [ 466.318928] Mem abort info: [ 466.321723] ESR = 0x0000000096000005 [ 466.325479] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits [ 466.330807] SET = 0, FnV = 0 [ 466.333864] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 [ 466.337010] FSC = 0x05: level 1 translation fault [ 466.341900] Data abort info: [ 466.344783] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000005, ISS2 = 0x00000000 [ 466.350285] CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0 [ 466.355350] GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0 [ 466.360677] user pgtable: 4k pages, 39-bit VAs, pgdp=0000000089772000 [ 466.367140] [00000000000000c0] pgd=0000000000000000, p4d=0000000000000000, pud=0000000000000000 [ 466.375875] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000005 [#1] PREEMPT SMP [ 466.382163] Modules linked in: rfcomm snd_seq_dummy snd_hrtimer snd_seq snd_seq_device algif_hash algif_skcipher af_alg bnep binfmt_misc vc4 snd_soc_hdmi_codec drm_display_helper cec brcmfmac_wcc spidev rpivid_hevc(C) drm_client_lib brcmfmac hci_uart drm_dma_helper pisp_be btbcm brcmutil snd_soc_core aes_ce_blk v4l2_mem2mem bluetooth aes_ce_cipher snd_compress videobuf2_dma_contig ghash_ce cfg80211 gf128mul snd_pcm_dmaengine videobuf2_memops ecdh_generic sha2_ce ecc videobuf2_v4l2 snd_pcm v3d sha256_arm64 rfkill videodev snd_timer sha1_ce libaes gpu_sched snd videobuf2_common sha1_generic drm_shmem_helper mc rp1_pio drm_kms_helper raspberrypi_hwmon spi_bcm2835 gpio_keys i2c_brcmstb rp1 raspberrypi_gpiomem rp1_mailbox rp1_adc nvmem_rmem uio_pdrv_genirq uio i2c_dev drm ledtrig_pattern drm_panel_orientation_quirks backlight fuse dm_mod ip_tables x_tables ipv6 [ 466.458429] CPU: 0 UID: 1000 PID: 2008 Comm: chromium Tainted: G C 6.13.0-v8+ #18 [ 466.467336] Tainted: [C]=CRAP [ 466.470306] Hardware name: Raspberry Pi 5 Model B Rev 1.0 (DT) [ 466.476157] pstate: 404000c9 (nZcv daIF +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 466.483143] pc : v3d_irq+0x118/0x2e0 [v3d] [ 466.487258] lr : __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x60/0x228 [ 466.492327] sp : ffffffc080003ea0 [ 466.495646] x29: ffffffc080003ea0 x28: ffffff80c0c94200 x27: 0000000000000000 [ 466.502807] x26: ffffffd08dd81d7b x25: ffffff80c0c94200 x24: ffffff8003bdc200 [ 466.509969] x23: 0000000000000001 x22: 00000000000000a7 x21: 0000000000000000 [ 466.517130] x20: ffffff8041bb0000 x19: 0000000000000001 x18: 0000000000000000 [ 466.524291] x17: ffffffafadfb0000 x16: ffffffc080000000 x15: 0000000000000000 [ 466.531452] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 0000000000000000 [ 466.538613] x11: 0000000000000000 x10: 0000000000000000 x9 : ffffffd08c527eb0 [ 466.545777] x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000000 [ 466.552941] x5 : ffffffd08c4100d0 x4 : ffffffafadfb0000 x3 : ffffffc080003f70 [ 466.560102] x2 : ffffffc0829e8058 x1 : 0000000000000001 x0 : 0000000000000000 [ 466.567263] Call trace: [ 466.569711] v3d_irq+0x118/0x2e0 [v3d] (P) [ 466. ---truncated---

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-362	Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.1	4.7	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H More informations Base: Exploitabilty Metrics The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope Metrics The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal Metrics The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.	[email protected]

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

EPSS First.org