BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-37791High confidence

ethtool: cmis_cdb: use correct rpl size in ethtool_cmis_module_poll()

Linux · Linux

7.8HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 8 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:Medium, lowered one band.downgradedsince 5 Aug 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.20% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Linux Linux and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 8 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

12 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 8 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azure-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gcp-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-hwe-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-lowlatency-hwe-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oem-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspi-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2025-37791 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 29 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2025-37791
42 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-default-extra as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • cluster-md-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • dlm-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • gfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • ocfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Live Patching 15 SP7
  • kernel-default-livepatch as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Live Patching 15 SP7
  • kernel-default-livepatch-devel as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Live Patching 15 SP7
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ethtool: cmis_cdb: use correct rpl size in ethtool_cmis_module_poll() rpl is passed as a pointer to ethtool_cmis_module_poll(), so the correct size of rpl is sizeof(*rpl) which should be just 1 byte. Using the pointer size instead can cause stack corruption: Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted in: ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 CPU: 72 UID: 0 PID: 4440 Comm: kworker/72:2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G OE 6.11.0 #24 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R760/04GWWM, BIOS 1.6.6 09/20/2023 Workqueue: events module_flash_fw_work Call Trace: panic+0x339/0x360 ? ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ? __pfx_status_success+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 __stack_chk_fail+0x10/0x10 ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ethtool_cmis_cdb_execute_cmd+0x1fc/0x330 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 cmis_cdb_module_features_get+0x6d/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_cdb_init+0x8a/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_fw_update+0x46/0x1d0 module_flash_fw_work+0x17/0xa0 process_one_work+0x179/0x390 worker_thread+0x239/0x340 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcc/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
Remediation
To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2025-13025

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 8 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ethtool: cmis_cdb: use correct rpl size in ethtool_cmis_module_poll() rpl is passed as a pointer to ethtool_cmis_module_poll(), so the correct size of rpl is sizeof(*rpl) which should be just 1 byte. Using the pointer size instead can cause stack corruption: Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted in: ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 CPU: 72 UID: 0 PID: 4440 Comm: kworker/72:2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G OE 6.11.0 #24 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R760/04GWWM, BIOS 1.6.6 09/20/2023 Workqueue: events module_flash_fw_work Call Trace: <TASK> panic+0x339/0x360 ? ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ? __pfx_status_success+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 __stack_chk_fail+0x10/0x10 ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ethtool_cmis_cdb_execute_cmd+0x1fc/0x330 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 cmis_cdb_module_features_get+0x6d/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_cdb_init+0x8a/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_fw_update+0x46/0x1d0 module_flash_fw_work+0x17/0xa0 process_one_work+0x179/0x390 worker_thread+0x239/0x340 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcc/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK>

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ethtool: cmis_cdb: use correct rpl size in ethtool_cmis_module_poll() rpl is passed as a pointer to ethtool_cmis_module_poll(), so the correct size of rpl is sizeof(*rpl) which should be just 1 byte. Using the pointer size instead can cause stack corruption: Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted in: ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 CPU: 72 UID: 0 PID: 4440 Comm: kworker/72:2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G OE 6.11.0 #24 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R760/04GWWM, BIOS 1.6.6 09/20/2023 Workqueue: events module_flash_fw_work Call Trace: <TASK> panic+0x339/0x360 ? ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ? __pfx_status_success+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 __stack_chk_fail+0x10/0x10 ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ethtool_cmis_cdb_execute_cmd+0x1fc/0x330 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 cmis_cdb_module_features_get+0x6d/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_cdb_init+0x8a/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_fw_update+0x46/0x1d0 module_flash_fw_work+0x17/0xa0 process_one_work+0x179/0x390 worker_thread+0x239/0x340 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcc/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK>

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ethtool: cmis_cdb: use correct rpl size in ethtool_cmis_module_poll() rpl is passed as a pointer to ethtool_cmis_module_poll(), so the correct size of rpl is sizeof(*rpl) which should be just 1 byte. Using the pointer size instead can cause stack corruption: Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted in: ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 CPU: 72 UID: 0 PID: 4440 Comm: kworker/72:2 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G OE 6.11.0 #24 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R760/04GWWM, BIOS 1.6.6 09/20/2023 Workqueue: events module_flash_fw_work Call Trace: <TASK> panic+0x339/0x360 ? ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ? __pfx_status_success+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 __stack_chk_fail+0x10/0x10 ethtool_cmis_wait_for_cond+0xf4/0x100 ethtool_cmis_cdb_execute_cmd+0x1fc/0x330 ? __pfx_status_fail+0x10/0x10 cmis_cdb_module_features_get+0x6d/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_cdb_init+0x8a/0xd0 ethtool_cmis_fw_update+0x46/0x1d0 module_flash_fw_work+0x17/0xa0 process_one_work+0x179/0x390 worker_thread+0x239/0x340 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcc/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK>

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
local access → vulnerable operation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration.
CWE not yet assigned
CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-0922Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff und nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20250507Security Bulletin 07 May 2025

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 07 May 2025, published on 7 May 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0607Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-37769 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37770 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37770 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37771 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37771 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37772 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37772 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37781 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37781 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37782 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37782 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37785 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37785 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37786 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37786 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37788 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37788 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37791 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37791 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37792 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37792 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37793 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37793 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37794 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37796 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37796 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37797 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37800 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37801 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0589Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-37781 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37783 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37783 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37784 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37784 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37785 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37785 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37786 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37786 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37787 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37787 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37788 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37788 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37789 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37789 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37790 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37790 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37791 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37791 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37792 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37792 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37793 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37793 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37794 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37796 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37796 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37797 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37799 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37799 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0587Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-37770 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37771 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37771 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37772 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37772 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37781 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37781 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37782 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37782 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37785 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37785 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37786 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37786 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37788 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37788 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37789 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37789 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37791 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37791 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37792 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37792 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37793 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37793 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37794 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37796 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37796 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37800 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37801 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37801 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37805 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0559Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-37781 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37783 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37783 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37784 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37784 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37785 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37785 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37786 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37786 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37787 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37787 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37788 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37788 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37789 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37789 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37790 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37790 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37791 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37791 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37792 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37792 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37793 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37793 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37794 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37796 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37796 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37797 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37799 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37799 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2025-025407LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける不特定の脆弱性

Linuxカーネルにおいて、ethtoolのcmis_cdbモジュールのethtool_cmis_module_poll()関数で正しいrplサイズが使用されていない脆弱性が修正されました。rplはポインタとして渡されるため、サイズは1バイトであるsizeof(*rpl)を使用するべきでしたが、ポインタのサイズが使われていたためスタック破損が発生する可能性がありました。その結果、カーネルパニックが引き起こされることがありました。この問題は適切なサイズの使用によって解決されました。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
Linux: < 6.11, 6.12.25 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.14.4 ≤ 6.14.*, 6.15 ≤ *
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 1 May 2025 · Last source change 5 Aug 2026, 11:57 UTC · CWE not yet assigned

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-13025
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Missing structured fields: CWE classification. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-13025↗Vendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2025-37791 · cve.blacktree.nl