Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2025-21799
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: net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpsw: fix freeing IRQ in am65_cpsw_nuss_remove_tx_chns() When getting the IRQ we use k3_udma_glue_tx_get_irq() which returns negative error value on error. So not NULL check is not sufficient to deteremine if IRQ is valid. Check that IRQ is greater then zero to ensure it is valid. There is no issue at probe time but at runtime user can invoke .set_channels which results in the following call chain. am65_cpsw_set_channels() am65_cpsw_nuss_update_tx_rx_chns() am65_cpsw_nuss_remove_tx_chns() am65_cpsw_nuss_init_tx_chns() At this point if am65_cpsw_nuss_init_tx_chns() fails due to k3_udma_glue_tx_get_irq() then tx_chn->irq will be set to a negative value. Then, at subsequent .set_channels with higher channel count we will attempt to free an invalid IRQ in am65_cpsw_nuss_remove_tx_chns() leading to a kernel warning. The issue is present in the original commit that introduced this driver, although there, am65_cpsw_nuss_update_tx_rx_chns() existed as am65_cpsw_nuss_update_tx_chns().
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
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 5.7, < 5.10.235>= 5.11, < 5.15.179>= 5.16, < 6.1.129>= 6.2, < 6.6.76>= 6.7, < 6.12.13>= 6.13, < 6.13.2CVSS 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 · scoped5.10.2355.15.1796.1.129
Linux kernel 5.10.235, 5.15.179, 6.1.129, or 6.6.76 (or any later stable release)
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version range your current kernel falls into from the affected versions: >= 5.7,<5.10.235, >=5.11,<5.15.179, >=5.16,<6.1.129, or >=6.2,<6.6.76
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to a version that includes the fix: 5.10.235 or later for the 5.10.x branch, 5.15.179 or later for the 5.15.x branch, 6.1.129 or later for the 6.1.x branch, or 6.6.76 or later for the 6.6.x branch
- After kernel upgrade, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version matches a fixed release
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-2025-21799 — 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-2025-21799 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