CVE-2025-21629 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-21629
Vulnerability Scoring

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-2025-21629 Details

Status: Received on 15 Jan 2025, 13:15 UTC

Published on: 15 Jan 2025, 13:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-21629 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-21629: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: reenable NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM offload for BIG TCP packets The blamed commit disabled hardware offoad of IPv6 packets with extension headers on devices that advertise NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM, based on the definition of that feature in skbuff.h: * * - %NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM * - Driver (device) is only able to checksum plain * TCP or UDP packets over IPv6. These are specifically * unencapsulated packets of the form IPv6|TCP or * IPv6|UDP where the Next Header field in the IPv6 * header is either TCP or UDP. IPv6 extension headers * are not supported with this feature. This feature * cannot be set in features for a device with * NETIF_F_HW_CSUM also set. This feature is being * DEPRECATED (see below). The change causes skb_warn_bad_offload to fire for BIG TCP packets. [ 496.310233] WARNING: CPU: 13 PID: 23472 at net/core/dev.c:3129 skb_warn_bad_offload+0xc4/0xe0 [ 496.310297] ? skb_warn_bad_offload+0xc4/0xe0 [ 496.310300] skb_checksum_help+0x129/0x1f0 [ 496.310303] skb_csum_hwoffload_help+0x150/0x1b0 [ 496.310306] validate_xmit_skb+0x159/0x270 [ 496.310309] validate_xmit_skb_list+0x41/0x70 [ 496.310312] sch_direct_xmit+0x5c/0x250 [ 496.310317] __qdisc_run+0x388/0x620 BIG TCP introduced an IPV6_TLV_JUMBO IPv6 extension header to communicate packet length, as this is an IPv6 jumbogram. But, the feature is only enabled on devices that support BIG TCP TSO. The header is only present for PF_PACKET taps like tcpdump, and not transmitted by physical devices. For this specific case of extension headers that are not transmitted, return to the situation before the blamed commit and support hardware offload. ipv6_has_hopopt_jumbo() tests not only whether this header is present, but also that it is the only extension header before a terminal (L4) header.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-21629

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-21629 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-2025-21629

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-21629.

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-2025-21629, 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-2025-21629, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

Confidentiality: None
CVE-2025-21629 does not compromise confidentiality.
Integrity: None
CVE-2025-21629 does not impact data integrity.
Availability: None
CVE-2025-21629 does not affect system availability.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.

EPSS Score: 0.045% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 18.4% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 81.6% of others.

CVE-2025-21629 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-21629: 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-2025-3800 – A vulnerability has been found in WCMS 11 and classified as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file app/co...
CVE-2025-3799 – A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in WCMS 11. Affected is an unknown function of the file app/controllers/AnonymousContr...
CVE-2025-3798 – A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in WCMS 11. This issue affects the function sub of the file app/admin/AdvadminCon...
CVE-2025-3661 – The SB Chart block plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the ‘className’ parameter in all versions up to, and inclu...
CVE-2025-3404 – The Download Manager plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the savePackage func...