CVE-2022-50665 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2022-50665
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-2022-50665 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 09 Dec 2025, 16:17 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2022-50665 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2022-50665: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: ath11k: fix failed to find the peer with peer_id 0 when disconnected It has a fail log which is ath11k_dbg in ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status(), as below, it will not print when debug_mask is not set ATH11K_DBG_DATA. ath11k_dbg(ab, ATH11K_DBG_DATA, "failed to find the peer with peer_id %d\n", ppdu_info.peer_id); When run scan with station disconnected, the peer_id is 0 for case HAL_RX_MPDU_START in ath11k_hal_rx_parse_mon_status_tlv() which called from ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status(), and the peer_id of ppdu_info is reset to 0 in the while loop, so it does not match condition of the check "if (ppdu_info->peer_id == HAL_INVALID_PEERID" in the loop, and then the log "failed to find the peer with peer_id 0" print after the check in the loop, it is below call stack when debug_mask is set ATH11K_DBG_DATA. The reason is this commit 01d2f285e3e5 ("ath11k: decode HE status tlv") add "memset(ppdu_info, 0, sizeof(struct hal_rx_mon_ppdu_info))" in ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status(), but the commit does not initialize the peer_id to HAL_INVALID_PEERID, then lead the check mis-match. Callstack of the failed log: [12335.689072] RIP: 0010:ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status+0x9ea/0x1020 [ath11k] [12335.689157] Code: 89 ff e8 f9 10 00 00 be 01 00 00 00 4c 89 f7 e8 dc 4b 4e de 48 8b 85 38 ff ff ff c7 80 e4 07 00 00 01 00 00 00 e9 20 f8 ff ff <0f> 0b 41 0f b7 96 be 06 00 00 48 c7 c6 b8 50 44 c1 4c 89 ff e8 fd [12335.689180] RSP: 0018:ffffb874001a4ca0 EFLAGS: 00010246 [12335.689210] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff995642cbd100 RCX: 0000000000000000 [12335.689229] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff99564212cd18 [12335.689248] RBP: ffffb874001a4dc0 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000 [12335.689268] R10: 0000000000000220 R11: ffffb874001a48e8 R12: ffff995642473d40 [12335.689286] R13: ffff99564212c5b8 R14: ffff9956424736a0 R15: ffff995642120000 [12335.689303] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff995739000000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [12335.689323] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [12335.689341] CR2: 00007f43c5d5e039 CR3: 000000011c012005 CR4: 00000000000606e0 [12335.689360] Call Trace: [12335.689377] <IRQ> [12335.689418] ? rcu_read_lock_held_common+0x12/0x50 [12335.689447] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x25/0x80 [12335.689471] ? rcu_read_lock_held_common+0x12/0x50 [12335.689504] ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_rings+0x8d/0x4f0 [ath11k] [12335.689578] ? ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_rings+0x8d/0x4f0 [ath11k] [12335.689653] ? lock_acquire+0xef/0x360 [12335.689681] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x25/0x80 [12335.689713] ath11k_dp_service_mon_ring+0x38/0x60 [ath11k] [12335.689784] ? ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_rings+0x4f0/0x4f0 [ath11k] [12335.689860] call_timer_fn+0xb2/0x2f0 [12335.689897] ? ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_rings+0x4f0/0x4f0 [ath11k] [12335.689970] run_timer_softirq+0x21f/0x540 [12335.689999] ? ktime_get+0xad/0x160 [12335.690025] ? lapic_next_deadline+0x2c/0x40 [12335.690053] ? clockevents_program_event+0x82/0x100 [12335.690093] __do_softirq+0x151/0x4a8 [12335.690135] irq_exit_rcu+0xc9/0x100 [12335.690165] sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0xa8/0xd0 [12335.690189] </IRQ> [12335.690204] <TASK> [12335.690225] asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x12/0x20 Reset the default value to HAL_INVALID_PEERID each time after memset of ppdu_info as well as others memset which existed in function ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status(), then the failed log disappeared. Tested-on: WCN6855 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.HSP.1.1-03125-QCAHSPSWPL_V1_V2_SILICONZ_LITE-3

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2022-50665

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2022-50665 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-2022-50665

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2022-50665.

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-2022-50665, 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-2022-50665, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2022-50665 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2022-50665 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2022-50665 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2022-50665 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2022-50665: 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-2025-15166 – A vulnerability was found in itsourcecode Online Cake Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /updatesupplier.php?action=...
  • CVE-2025-15165 – A vulnerability has been found in itsourcecode Online Cake Ordering System 1.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /updatecust...
  • CVE-2025-15164 – A security flaw has been discovered in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. This affects an unknown part of the file /goform/SafeMacFilter. The manipulation of th...
  • CVE-2025-15163 – A vulnerability was identified in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /goform/SafeEmailFilter. T...
  • CVE-2025-15067 – Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type vulnerability in Innorix Innorix WP allows Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server.This issue affects In...