CVE-2025-37799
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: vmxnet3: Fix malformed packet sizing in vmxnet3_process_xdp vmxnet3 driver's XDP handling is buggy for packet sizes using ring0 (that is, packet sizes between 128 - 3k bytes). We noticed MTU-related connectivity issues with Cilium's service load- balancing in case of vmxnet3 as NIC underneath. A simple curl to a HTTP backend service where the XDP LB was doing IPIP encap led to overly large packet sizes but only for *some* of the packets (e.g. HTTP GET request) while others (e.g. the prior TCP 3WHS) looked completely fine on the wire. In fact, the pcap recording on the backend node actually revealed that the node with the XDP LB was leaking uninitialized kernel data onto the wire for the affected packets, for example, while the packets should have been 152 bytes their actual size was 1482 bytes, so the remainder after 152 bytes was padded with whatever other data was in that page at the time (e.g. we saw user/payload data from prior processed packets). We only noticed this through an MTU issue, e.g. when the XDP LB node and the backend node both had the same MTU (e.g. 1500) then the curl request got dropped on the backend node's NIC given the packet was too large even though the IPIP-encapped packet normally would never even come close to the MTU limit. Lowering the MTU on the XDP LB (e.g. 1480) allowed to let the curl request succeed (which also indicates that the kernel ignored the padding, and thus the issue wasn't very user-visible). Commit e127ce7699c1 ("vmxnet3: Fix missing reserved tailroom") was too eager to also switch xdp_prepare_buff() from rcd->len to rbi->len. It really needs to stick to rcd->len which is the actual packet length from the descriptor. The latter we also feed into vmxnet3_process_xdp_small(), by the way, and it indicates the correct length needed to initialize the xdp->{data,data_end} parts. For e127ce7699c1 ("vmxnet3: Fix missing reserved tailroom") the relevant part was adapting xdp_init_buff() to address the warning given the xdp_data_hard_end() depends on xdp->frame_sz. With that fixed, traffic on the wire looks good again.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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>= 6.6.23, < 6.6.89>= 6.7.11, < 6.8>= 6.8.2, < 6.12.26>= 6.13, < 6.14.5= 6.15CVSS 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 · scoped6.6.896.86.12.26
6.6.89 or 6.12.26 or 6.14.5 (depending on current branch)
- 1. Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- 2. Determine which kernel branch your version belongs to (e.g., 6.6.y, 6.7.y, 6.8.y, 6.12.y, 6.13.y, or 6.14.y)
- 3. For 6.6.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.6.89 or later
- 4. For 6.7.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.8 or later (6.7.x is EOL, migrate to 6.8 or newer)
- 5. For 6.8.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.12.26 or later
- 6. For 6.12.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.12.26 or later
- 7. For 6.13.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.14.5 or later
- 8. For 6.14.y branches: upgrade to kernel version 6.14.5 or later
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-2025-37799 — 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-2025-37799 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