CVE-2025-40003 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-40003
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-2025-40003 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕢 21 Oct 2025, 19:31 UTC
Originally published on: 🕗 18 Oct 2025, 08:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 3 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-40003 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-40003: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: mscc: ocelot: Fix use-after-free caused by cyclic delayed work The origin code calls cancel_delayed_work() in ocelot_stats_deinit() to cancel the cyclic delayed work item ocelot->stats_work. However, cancel_delayed_work() may fail to cancel the work item if it is already executing. While destroy_workqueue() does wait for all pending work items in the work queue to complete before destroying the work queue, it cannot prevent the delayed work item from being rescheduled within the ocelot_check_stats_work() function. This limitation exists because the delayed work item is only enqueued into the work queue after its timer expires. Before the timer expiration, destroy_workqueue() has no visibility of this pending work item. Once the work queue appears empty, destroy_workqueue() proceeds with destruction. When the timer eventually expires, the delayed work item gets queued again, leading to the following warning: workqueue: cannot queue ocelot_check_stats_work on wq ocelot-switch-stats WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 0 at kernel/workqueue.c:2255 __queue_work+0x875/0xaf0 ... RIP: 0010:__queue_work+0x875/0xaf0 ... RSP: 0018:ffff88806d108b10 EFLAGS: 00010086 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000101 RCX: 0000000000000027 RDX: 0000000000000027 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: ffff88806d123e88 RBP: ffffffff813c3170 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffed100da247d2 R10: ffffed100da247d1 R11: ffff88806d123e8b R12: ffff88800c00f000 R13: ffff88800d7285c0 R14: ffff88806d0a5580 R15: ffff88800d7285a0 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8880e5725000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007fe18e45ea10 CR3: 0000000005e6c000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 Call Trace: <IRQ> ? kasan_report+0xc6/0xf0 ? __pfx_delayed_work_timer_fn+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_delayed_work_timer_fn+0x10/0x10 call_timer_fn+0x25/0x1c0 __run_timer_base.part.0+0x3be/0x8c0 ? __pfx_delayed_work_timer_fn+0x10/0x10 ? rcu_sched_clock_irq+0xb06/0x27d0 ? __pfx___run_timer_base.part.0+0x10/0x10 ? try_to_wake_up+0xb15/0x1960 ? _raw_spin_lock_irq+0x80/0xe0 ? __pfx__raw_spin_lock_irq+0x10/0x10 tmigr_handle_remote_up+0x603/0x7e0 ? __pfx_tmigr_handle_remote_up+0x10/0x10 ? sched_balance_trigger+0x1c0/0x9f0 ? sched_tick+0x221/0x5a0 ? _raw_spin_lock_irq+0x80/0xe0 ? __pfx__raw_spin_lock_irq+0x10/0x10 ? tick_nohz_handler+0x339/0x440 ? __pfx_tmigr_handle_remote_up+0x10/0x10 __walk_groups.isra.0+0x42/0x150 tmigr_handle_remote+0x1f4/0x2e0 ? __pfx_tmigr_handle_remote+0x10/0x10 ? ktime_get+0x60/0x140 ? lapic_next_event+0x11/0x20 ? clockevents_program_event+0x1d4/0x2a0 ? hrtimer_interrupt+0x322/0x780 handle_softirqs+0x16a/0x550 irq_exit_rcu+0xaf/0xe0 sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x70/0x80 </IRQ> ... The following diagram reveals the cause of the above warning: CPU 0 (remove) | CPU 1 (delayed work callback) mscc_ocelot_remove() | ocelot_deinit() | ocelot_check_stats_work() ocelot_stats_deinit() | cancel_delayed_work()| ... | queue_delayed_work() destroy_workqueue() | (wait a time) | __queue_work() //UAF The above scenario actually constitutes a UAF vulnerability. The ocelot_stats_deinit() is only invoked when initialization failure or resource destruction, so we must ensure that any delayed work items cannot be rescheduled. Replace cancel_delayed_work() with disable_delayed_work_sync() to guarantee proper cancellation of the delayed work item and ensure completion of any currently executing work before the workqueue is deallocated. A deadlock concern was considered: ocelot_stats_deinit() is called in a process context and is not holding any locks that the delayed work item might also need. Therefore, the use of the _sync() variant is safe here. This bug was identified through static analysis. To reproduce the issue and validate the fix, I simulated ocelot-swit ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-40003

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-40003 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-2025-40003

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-40003.

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-2025-40003, 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-2025-40003, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

Confidentiality: None
CVE-2025-40003 does not compromise confidentiality.
Integrity: None
CVE-2025-40003 does not impact data integrity.
Availability: None
CVE-2025-40003 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-40003 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-40003: 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-2025-13735 – Out-of-bounds Read vulnerability in ASR1903、ASR3901 in ASR Lapwing_Linux on Linux (nr_fw modules). This vulnerability is associated with program fi...
CVE-2025-9558 – There is a potential OOB Write vulnerability in the gen_prov_start function in pb_adv.c. The full length of the received data is copied into the li...
CVE-2025-9557 – ‭An out-of-bound write can lead to an arbitrary code execution. Even on devices with some form of memory protection, this can still lead to‬ ‭a cra...
CVE-2025-59820 – In KDE Krita before 5.2.13, loading a manipulated TGA file could result in a heap-based buffer overflow in plugins/impex/tga/kis_tga_import.cpp (ak...
CVE-2025-55174 – In KDE Skanpage before 25.08.0, an attempt at file overwrite can result in the contents of the new file at the beginning followed by the partial co...