CVE-2025-21664 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-21664
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-2025-21664 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕚 02 Feb 2025, 11:15 UTC
Originally published on: 🕐 21 Jan 2025, 13:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 11 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-21664 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-21664: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm thin: make get_first_thin use rcu-safe list first function The documentation in rculist.h explains the absence of list_empty_rcu() and cautions programmers against relying on a list_empty() -> list_first() sequence in RCU safe code. This is because each of these functions performs its own READ_ONCE() of the list head. This can lead to a situation where the list_empty() sees a valid list entry, but the subsequent list_first() sees a different view of list head state after a modification. In the case of dm-thin, this author had a production box crash from a GP fault in the process_deferred_bios path. This function saw a valid list head in get_first_thin() but when it subsequently dereferenced that and turned it into a thin_c, it got the inside of the struct pool, since the list was now empty and referring to itself. The kernel on which this occurred printed both a warning about a refcount_t being saturated, and a UBSAN error for an out-of-bounds cpuid access in the queued spinlock, prior to the fault itself. When the resulting kdump was examined, it was possible to see another thread patiently waiting in thin_dtr's synchronize_rcu. The thin_dtr call managed to pull the thin_c out of the active thins list (and have it be the last entry in the active_thins list) at just the wrong moment which lead to this crash. Fortunately, the fix here is straight forward. Switch get_first_thin() function to use list_first_or_null_rcu() which performs just a single READ_ONCE() and returns NULL if the list is already empty. This was run against the devicemapper test suite's thin-provisioning suites for delete and suspend and no regressions were observed.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-21664

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-21664 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-2025-21664

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-21664.

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-2025-21664, 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-2025-21664, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-21664 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-21664 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-21664 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: 0.044% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 12.92% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 87.08% of others.

CVE-2025-21664 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-21664: 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...