Vulnerability Monitor

The vendors, products, and vulnerabilities you care about

CVE-2025-37859


In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: page_pool: avoid infinite loop to schedule delayed worker We noticed the kworker in page_pool_release_retry() was waken up repeatedly and infinitely in production because of the buggy driver causing the inflight less than 0 and warning us in page_pool_inflight()[1]. Since the inflight value goes negative, it means we should not expect the whole page_pool to get back to work normally. This patch mitigates the adverse effect by not rescheduling the kworker when detecting the inflight negative in page_pool_release_retry(). [1] [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] Negative(-51446) inflight packet-pages ... [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] Call Trace: [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] page_pool_release_retry+0x23/0x70 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] process_one_work+0x1b1/0x370 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] worker_thread+0x37/0x3a0 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] kthread+0x11a/0x140 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] ? process_one_work+0x370/0x370 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] ? __kthread_cancel_work+0x40/0x40 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] ret_from_fork+0x35/0x40 [Mon Feb 10 20:36:11 2025] ---[ end trace ebffe800f33e7e34 ]--- Note: before this patch, the above calltrace would flood the dmesg due to repeated reschedule of release_dw kworker.


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

2025-05-09T07:16:06.960

Last Modified

2025-11-12T20:10:45.307

Status

Analyzed

Source

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

Severity

CVSSv3.1: 5.5 (MEDIUM)

Weaknesses
  • Type: Primary
    CWE-835

Affected Vendors & Products
Type Vendor Product Version/Range Vulnerable?
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 5.4 Yes
Operating System linux linux_kernel < 5.4.293 Yes
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.