Security assessments indicate that CVE-2025-37821 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.
Status: Analyzed
Last updated: 🕘 12 Nov 2025, 21:23 UTC
Originally published on: 🕖 08 May 2025, 07:15 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 188 days
CVSS Release: version 3
nvd@nist.gov
Primary
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVE-2025-37821: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/eevdf: Fix se->slice being set to U64_MAX and resulting crash There is a code path in dequeue_entities() that can set the slice of a sched_entity to U64_MAX, which sometimes results in a crash. The offending case is when dequeue_entities() is called to dequeue a delayed group entity, and then the entity's parent's dequeue is delayed. In that case: 1. In the if (entity_is_task(se)) else block at the beginning of dequeue_entities(), slice is set to cfs_rq_min_slice(group_cfs_rq(se)). If the entity was delayed, then it has no queued tasks, so cfs_rq_min_slice() returns U64_MAX. 2. The first for_each_sched_entity() loop dequeues the entity. 3. If the entity was its parent's only child, then the next iteration tries to dequeue the parent. 4. If the parent's dequeue needs to be delayed, then it breaks from the first for_each_sched_entity() loop _without updating slice_. 5. The second for_each_sched_entity() loop sets the parent's ->slice to the saved slice, which is still U64_MAX. This throws off subsequent calculations with potentially catastrophic results. A manifestation we saw in production was: 6. In update_entity_lag(), se->slice is used to calculate limit, which ends up as a huge negative number. 7. limit is used in se->vlag = clamp(vlag, -limit, limit). Because limit is negative, vlag > limit, so se->vlag is set to the same huge negative number. 8. In place_entity(), se->vlag is scaled, which overflows and results in another huge (positive or negative) number. 9. The adjusted lag is subtracted from se->vruntime, which increases or decreases se->vruntime by a huge number. 10. pick_eevdf() calls entity_eligible()/vruntime_eligible(), which incorrectly returns false because the vruntime is so far from the other vruntimes on the queue, causing the (vruntime - cfs_rq->min_vruntime) * load calulation to overflow. 11. Nothing appears to be eligible, so pick_eevdf() returns NULL. 12. pick_next_entity() tries to dereference the return value of pick_eevdf() and crashes. Dumping the cfs_rq states from the core dumps with drgn showed tell-tale huge vruntime ranges and bogus vlag values, and I also traced se->slice being set to U64_MAX on live systems (which was usually "benign" since the rest of the runqueue needed to be in a particular state to crash). Fix it in dequeue_entities() by always setting slice from the first non-empty cfs_rq.
The exploitability of CVE-2025-37821 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).
CVE-2025-37821 presents an accessible attack vector with minimal effort required. Restricting access controls and implementing security updates are critical to reducing exploitation risks.
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.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-37821, 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.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-37821, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
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.