CVE-2022-50425
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/fpu: Fix copy_xstate_to_uabi() to copy init states correctly When an extended state component is not present in fpstate, but in init state, the function copies from init_fpstate via copy_feature(). But, dynamic states are not present in init_fpstate because of all-zeros init states. Then retrieving them from init_fpstate will explode like this: BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 ... RIP: 0010:memcpy_erms+0x6/0x10 ? __copy_xstate_to_uabi_buf+0x381/0x870 fpu_copy_guest_fpstate_to_uabi+0x28/0x80 kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl+0x14c/0x1460 [kvm] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20 ? vmx_vcpu_put+0x2e/0x260 [kvm_intel] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0xea/0x6b0 [kvm] ? kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0xea/0x6b0 [kvm] ? __fget_light+0xd4/0x130 __x64_sys_ioctl+0xe3/0x910 ? debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20 ? fpregs_assert_state_consistent+0x27/0x50 do_syscall_64+0x3f/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd Adjust the 'mask' to zero out the userspace buffer for the features that are not available both from fpstate and from init_fpstate. The dynamic features depend on the compacted XSAVE format. Ensure it is enabled before reading XCOMP_BV in init_fpstate.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisThe code follows a pointer that is null, crashing the process. An attacker who can reliably trigger it turns the crash into a denial of service. The fix is checking for null before use and handling the failure path gracefully.
General guidance for the null pointer dereference class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 5.16, < 6.0.7= 6.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.0.7
Linux Kernel 6.0.7 or later, or Linux Kernel 6.1.1 or later
- Identify current kernel version using `uname -r` or `cat /proc/version`
- If running kernel >= 5.16 and < 6.0.7, plan upgrade to 6.0.7 or later
- If running kernel == 6.1, plan upgrade to 6.1.1 or later
- For enterprise distributions, apply vendor-provided kernel security update containing commit 471f0aa7fa64e23766a1473b32d9ec3f0718895a
- Reboot into the patched kernel
- Verify fix by checking kernel version with `uname -r` and confirming the patch is applied
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-50425 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-50425 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data