CVE-2025-38614 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-38614
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2025-38614 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕒 28 Aug 2025, 15:15 UTC
Originally published on: 🕔 19 Aug 2025, 17:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 8 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-38614 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-38614: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: eventpoll: Fix semi-unbounded recursion Ensure that epoll instances can never form a graph deeper than EP_MAX_NESTS+1 links. Currently, ep_loop_check_proc() ensures that the graph is loop-free and does some recursion depth checks, but those recursion depth checks don't limit the depth of the resulting tree for two reasons: - They don't look upwards in the tree. - If there are multiple downwards paths of different lengths, only one of the paths is actually considered for the depth check since commit 28d82dc1c4ed ("epoll: limit paths"). Essentially, the current recursion depth check in ep_loop_check_proc() just serves to prevent it from recursing too deeply while checking for loops. A more thorough check is done in reverse_path_check() after the new graph edge has already been created; this checks, among other things, that no paths going upwards from any non-epoll file with a length of more than 5 edges exist. However, this check does not apply to non-epoll files. As a result, it is possible to recurse to a depth of at least roughly 500, tested on v6.15. (I am unsure if deeper recursion is possible; and this may have changed with commit 8c44dac8add7 ("eventpoll: Fix priority inversion problem").) To fix it: 1. In ep_loop_check_proc(), note the subtree depth of each visited node, and use subtree depths for the total depth calculation even when a subtree has already been visited. 2. Add ep_get_upwards_depth_proc() for similarly determining the maximum depth of an upwards walk. 3. In ep_loop_check(), use these values to limit the total path length between epoll nodes to EP_MAX_NESTS edges.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-38614

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-38614 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2025-38614

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-38614.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-38614, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-38614, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-38614 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-38614 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-38614 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-38614 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-38614: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-58445 – Atlantis is a self-hosted golang application that listens for Terraform pull request events via webhooks. All versions of Atlantis publicly expose ...
  • CVE-2025-58443 – FOG is a free open-source cloning/imaging/rescue suite/inventory management system. Versions 1.5.10.1673 and below contain an authentication bypass...
  • CVE-2025-58446 – xgrammar is an open-source library for efficient, flexible, and portable structured generation. A grammar optimizer introduced in 0.1.23 processes ...
  • CVE-2025-58438 – internetarchive is a Python and Command-Line Interface to Archive.org In versions 5.5.0 and below, there is a directory traversal (path traversal) ...
  • CVE-2025-0034 – Insufficient parameter sanitization in TEE SOC Driver could allow an attacker to issue a malformed DRV_SOC_CMD_ID_SRIOV_SPATIAL_PART and cause read...