CVE-2025-38190
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: atm: Revert atm_account_tx() if copy_from_iter_full() fails. In vcc_sendmsg(), we account skb->truesize to sk->sk_wmem_alloc by atm_account_tx(). It is expected to be reverted by atm_pop_raw() later called by vcc->dev->ops->send(vcc, skb). However, vcc_sendmsg() misses the same revert when copy_from_iter_full() fails, and then we will leak a socket. Let's factorise the revert part as atm_return_tx() and call it in the failure path. Note that the corresponding sk_wmem_alloc operation can be found in alloc_tx() as of the blamed commit. $ git blame -L:alloc_tx net/atm/common.c c55fa3cccbc2c~
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>= 2.6.13, < 5.4.295>= 5.5, < 5.10.239>= 5.11, < 5.15.186>= 5.16, < 6.1.142>= 6.2, < 6.6.95>= 6.7, < 6.12.35>= 6.13, < 6.15.4= 2.6.12= 6.16= 11.0CVSS 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 · scoped5.4.2955.10.2395.15.186
Linux Kernel 5.4.295+ / 5.10.239+ / 5.15.186+ / 6.1.142+ or Debian 11 kernel with patch applied
- Check current kernel version: uname -r
- Identify the appropriate upgrade version based on your current kernel branch: For 5.4.x upgrade to >=5.4.295, for 5.10.x upgrade to >=5.10.239, for 5.15.x upgrade to >=5.15.186, for 6.1.x upgrade to >=6.1.142
- For Debian 11 (bullseye), check for available kernel updates: apt-get update && apt-cache policy linux-image-*
- Upgrade the kernel package using your distribution's package manager: apt-get install linux-image-<version> or yum/dnf update kernel
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version after reboot
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-2025-38190 — 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-2025-38190 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