CVE-2025-22115 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-22115
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-2025-22115 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕗 17 Apr 2025, 20:22 UTC
Originally published on: 🕒 16 Apr 2025, 15:16 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 1 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-22115 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-22115: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix block group refcount race in btrfs_create_pending_block_groups() Block group creation is done in two phases, which results in a slightly unintuitive property: a block group can be allocated/deallocated from after btrfs_make_block_group() adds it to the space_info with btrfs_add_bg_to_space_info(), but before creation is completely completed in btrfs_create_pending_block_groups(). As a result, it is possible for a block group to go unused and have 'btrfs_mark_bg_unused' called on it concurrently with 'btrfs_create_pending_block_groups'. This causes a number of issues, which were fixed with the block group flag 'BLOCK_GROUP_FLAG_NEW'. However, this fix is not quite complete. Since it does not use the unused_bg_lock, it is possible for the following race to occur: btrfs_create_pending_block_groups btrfs_mark_bg_unused if list_empty // false list_del_init clear_bit else if (test_bit) // true list_move_tail And we get into the exact same broken ref count and invalid new_bgs state for transaction cleanup that BLOCK_GROUP_FLAG_NEW was designed to prevent. The broken refcount aspect will result in a warning like: [1272.943527] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. [1272.943967] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 61 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.944731] Modules linked in: btrfs virtio_net xor zstd_compress raid6_pq null_blk [last unloaded: btrfs] [1272.945550] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 61 Comm: kworker/u32:1 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W 6.14.0-rc5+ #108 [1272.946368] Tainted: [W]=WARN [1272.946585] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Arch Linux 1.16.3-1-1 04/01/2014 [1272.947273] Workqueue: btrfs_discard btrfs_discard_workfn [btrfs] [1272.947788] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.949532] RSP: 0018:ffffbf1200247df0 EFLAGS: 00010282 [1272.949901] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffa14b00e3f800 RCX: 0000000000000000 [1272.950437] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffbf1200247c78 RDI: 00000000ffffdfff [1272.950986] RBP: ffffa14b00dc2860 R08: 00000000ffffdfff R09: ffffffff90526268 [1272.951512] R10: ffffffff904762c0 R11: 0000000063666572 R12: ffffa14b00dc28c0 [1272.952024] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffffa14b00dc2868 R15: 000001285dcd12c0 [1272.952850] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffffa14d33c40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [1272.953458] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [1272.953931] CR2: 00007f838cbda000 CR3: 000000010104e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 [1272.954474] Call Trace: [1272.954655] <TASK> [1272.954812] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.955173] ? __warn.cold+0x93/0xd7 [1272.955487] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.955816] ? report_bug+0xe7/0x120 [1272.956103] ? handle_bug+0x53/0x90 [1272.956424] ? exc_invalid_op+0x13/0x60 [1272.956700] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20 [1272.957011] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.957399] btrfs_discard_cancel_work.cold+0x26/0x2b [btrfs] [1272.957853] btrfs_put_block_group.cold+0x5d/0x8e [btrfs] [1272.958289] btrfs_discard_workfn+0x194/0x380 [btrfs] [1272.958729] process_one_work+0x130/0x290 [1272.959026] worker_thread+0x2ea/0x420 [1272.959335] ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 [1272.959644] kthread+0xd7/0x1c0 [1272.959872] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [1272.960172] ret_from_fork+0x30/0x50 [1272.960474] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [1272.960745] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 [1272.961035] </TASK> [1272.961238] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Though we have seen them in the async discard workfn as well. It is most likely to happen after a relocation finishes which cancels discard, tears down the block group, etc. Fix this fully by taking the lock arou ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-22115

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-22115 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-2025-22115

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-22115.

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-2025-22115, 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-2025-22115, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-22115 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-22115 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-22115 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-22115 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-22115: 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-2025-3805 – A vulnerability classified as critical was found in sarrionandia tournatrack up to 4c13a23f43da5317eea4614870a7a8510fc540ec. Affected by this vulne...
  • CVE-2025-3804 – A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in thautwarm vscode-diana 0.0.1. Affected is an unknown function of the file Gen.py of the co...
  • CVE-2025-3803 – A vulnerability was found in Tenda W12 and i24 3.0.0.4(2887)/3.0.0.5(3644). It has been rated as critical. This issue affects the function cgiSysSc...
  • CVE-2025-3802 – A vulnerability was found in Tenda W12 and i24 3.0.0.4(2887)/3.0.0.5(3644). It has been declared as critical. This vulnerability affects the functi...
  • CVE-2025-3801 – A vulnerability was found in songquanpeng one-api up to 0.6.10. It has been classified as problematic. This affects an unknown part of the componen...