CVE-2025-38170 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-38170
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-2025-38170 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 03 Jul 2025, 09:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-38170 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-38170: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64/fpsimd: Discard stale CPU state when handling SME traps The logic for handling SME traps manipulates saved FPSIMD/SVE/SME state incorrectly, and a race with preemption can result in a task having TIF_SME set and TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE clear even though the live CPU state is stale (e.g. with SME traps enabled). This can result in warnings from do_sme_acc() where SME traps are not expected while TIF_SME is set: | /* With TIF_SME userspace shouldn't generate any traps */ | if (test_and_set_thread_flag(TIF_SME)) | WARN_ON(1); This is very similar to the SVE issue we fixed in commit: 751ecf6afd6568ad ("arm64/sve: Discard stale CPU state when handling SVE traps") The race can occur when the SME trap handler is preempted before and after manipulating the saved FPSIMD/SVE/SME state, starting and ending on the same CPU, e.g. | void do_sme_acc(unsigned long esr, struct pt_regs *regs) | { | // Trap on CPU 0 with TIF_SME clear, SME traps enabled | // task->fpsimd_cpu is 0. | // per_cpu_ptr(&fpsimd_last_state, 0) is task. | | ... | | // Preempted; migrated from CPU 0 to CPU 1. | // TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE is set. | | get_cpu_fpsimd_context(); | | /* With TIF_SME userspace shouldn't generate any traps */ | if (test_and_set_thread_flag(TIF_SME)) | WARN_ON(1); | | if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE)) { | unsigned long vq_minus_one = | sve_vq_from_vl(task_get_sme_vl(current)) - 1; | sme_set_vq(vq_minus_one); | | fpsimd_bind_task_to_cpu(); | } | | put_cpu_fpsimd_context(); | | // Preempted; migrated from CPU 1 to CPU 0. | // task->fpsimd_cpu is still 0 | // If per_cpu_ptr(&fpsimd_last_state, 0) is still task then: | // - Stale HW state is reused (with SME traps enabled) | // - TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE is cleared | // - A return to userspace skips HW state restore | } Fix the case where the state is not live and TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE is set by calling fpsimd_flush_task_state() to detach from the saved CPU state. This ensures that a subsequent context switch will not reuse the stale CPU state, and will instead set TIF_FOREIGN_FPSTATE, forcing the new state to be reloaded from memory prior to a return to userspace. Note: this was originallly posted as [1]. [ Rutland: rewrite commit message ]

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-38170

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-38170 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-2025-38170

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-38170.

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-2025-38170, 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-2025-38170, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-38170 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-38170 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-38170 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-38170 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-38170: 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-2025-5961 – The Migration, Backup, Staging – WPvivid Backup & Migration plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file uploads due to missing file type v...
  • CVE-2025-50263 – Tenda AC6 v15.03.05.16_multi is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow in the fromSetRouteStatic function via the list parameter.
  • CVE-2025-50262 – Tenda AC6 v15.03.05.16_multi is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow in the formSetQosBand function via the list parameter.
  • CVE-2025-50260 – Tenda AC6 v15.03.05.16_multi is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow in the formSetFirewallCfg function via the firewallEn parameter.
  • CVE-2025-50258 – Tenda AC6 v15.03.05.16_multi is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow in the SetSysTimeCfg function via the time parameter.