Vulnerability Monitor

The vendors, products, and vulnerabilities you care about

CVE-2025-23145


In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mptcp: fix NULL pointer in can_accept_new_subflow When testing valkey benchmark tool with MPTCP, the kernel panics in 'mptcp_can_accept_new_subflow' because subflow_req->msk is NULL. Call trace: mptcp_can_accept_new_subflow (./net/mptcp/subflow.c:63 (discriminator 4)) (P) subflow_syn_recv_sock (./net/mptcp/subflow.c:854) tcp_check_req (./net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c:863) tcp_v4_rcv (./net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c:2268) ip_protocol_deliver_rcu (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:207) ip_local_deliver_finish (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:234) ip_local_deliver (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:254) ip_rcv_finish (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:449) ... According to the debug log, the same req received two SYN-ACK in a very short time, very likely because the client retransmits the syn ack due to multiple reasons. Even if the packets are transmitted with a relevant time interval, they can be processed by the server on different CPUs concurrently). The 'subflow_req->msk' ownership is transferred to the subflow the first, and there will be a risk of a null pointer dereference here. This patch fixes this issue by moving the 'subflow_req->msk' under the `own_req == true` conditional. Note that the !msk check in subflow_hmac_valid() can be dropped, because the same check already exists under the own_req mpj branch where the code has been moved to.


Security Impact Summary

This vulnerability carries a MEDIUM severity rating with a CVSS v3.1 score of 5.5, requiring local system access to exploit with relatively low complexity without requiring user interaction requiring only low-level privileges . The vulnerability impacts and availability (service disruption) for affected systems. Impacting 2 products from linux, from debian organizations running these solutions should prioritize assessment and patching.

Historical Context

Reported in 2025, this vulnerability emerged during an era marked by increased sophistication in supply chain attacks, cloud infrastructure vulnerabilities, and software-as-a-service (SaaS) security challenges. Security practices during this period emphasized zero-trust architectures, container security, and API protection.


Published

2025-05-01T13:15:50.343

Last Modified

2025-11-05T18:05:35.210

Status

Analyzed

Source

416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Severity

CVSSv3.1: 5.5 (MEDIUM)

Weaknesses
  • Type: Primary
    CWE-476

Affected Vendors & Products
Type Vendor Product Version/Range Vulnerable?
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 5.10.237 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 5.15.181 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 6.1.135 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 6.6.88 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 6.12.24 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 6.13.12 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 6.14.3 Yes
Operating System debian debian_linux 11.0 Yes

References

How SecUtils Interprets This CVE

SecUtils normalizes and enriches National Vulnerability Database (NVD) records by standardizing vendor and product identifiers, aggregating vulnerability metadata from both NVD and MITRE sources, and providing structured context for security teams. For linux's affected products, we extract Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) data, Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) classifications, CVSS severity metrics, and reference data to enable rapid vulnerability prioritization and asset correlation. This record contains no exploit code, proof-of-concept instructions, or attack methodologies—only defensive intelligence necessary for patch management, risk assessment, and security operations.