Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2025-38377
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: rose: fix dangling neighbour pointers in rose_rt_device_down() There are two bugs in rose_rt_device_down() that can cause use-after-free: 1. The loop bound `t->count` is modified within the loop, which can cause the loop to terminate early and miss some entries. 2. When removing an entry from the neighbour array, the subsequent entries are moved up to fill the gap, but the loop index `i` is still incremented, causing the next entry to be skipped. For example, if a node has three neighbours (A, A, B) with count=3 and A is being removed, the second A is not checked. i=0: (A, A, B) -> (A, B) with count=2 ^ checked i=1: (A, B) -> (A, B) with count=2 ^ checked (B, not A!) i=2: (doesn't occur because i < count is false) This leaves the second A in the array with count=2, but the rose_neigh structure has been freed. Code that accesses these entries assumes that the first `count` entries are valid pointers, causing a use-after-free when it accesses the dangling pointer. Fix both issues by iterating over the array in reverse order with a fixed loop bound. This ensures that all entries are examined and that the removal of an entry doesn't affect subsequent iterations.
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 analysisMemory is used after it has been freed, so its contents — now potentially attacker-controlled — drive the program's behaviour. With careful heap grooming this becomes code execution. The fix requires disciplined ownership of memory and often a targeted rework of the object lifecycle.
General guidance for the use after free 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
>= 2.6.13, < 5.4.296>= 5.5, < 5.10.240>= 5.11, < 5.15.187>= 5.16, < 6.1.144>= 6.2, < 6.6.97>= 6.7, < 6.12.37>= 6.13, < 6.15.6= 2.6.12= 6.16
Debian LinuxOperating system
= 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped5.4.2965.10.2405.15.187
Upgrade Linux kernel to version 5.4.296, 5.10.240, 5.15.187, 6.1.144 or later (or newer stable release). For Debian 11, apply Debian security update.
- 1. Check the currently running kernel version: uname -r
- 2. Verify if the running kernel version is affected by checking against the vulnerable version ranges: < 5.4.296, < 5.10.240, < 5.15.187, or < 6.1.144
- 3. For Debian 11 (Bullseye), update the system to receive the patched kernel: apt update && apt install linux-image-$(uname -r | sed 's/-.*//')
- 4. Alternatively, upgrade to a fixed kernel release: 5.4.296+, 5.10.240+, 5.15.187+, or 6.1.144+ (or newer stable release)
- 5. After kernel upgrade, reboot the system: reboot
- 6. Verify the new kernel is running and is version 5.4.296+, 5.10.240+, 5.15.187+, or 6.1.144+: uname -r
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-2025-38377 — 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-2025-38377 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