dbcve.org
VulnerabilityAwaiting classification

CVE-2025-68301

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-12-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: atlantic: fix fragment overflow handling in RX path The atlantic driver can receive packets with more than MAX_SKB_FRAGS (17) fragments when handling large multi-descriptor packets. This causes an out-of-bounds write in skb_add_rx_frag_netmem() leading to kernel panic. The issue occurs because the driver doesn't check the total number of fragments before calling skb_add_rx_frag(). When a packet requires more than MAX_SKB_FRAGS fragments, the fragment index exceeds the array bounds. Fix by assuming there will be an extra frag if buff->len > AQ_CFG_RX_HDR_SIZE, then all fragments are accounted for. And reusing the existing check to prevent the overflow earlier in the code path. This crash occurred in production with an Aquantia AQC113 10G NIC. Stack trace from production environment: ``` RIP: 0010:skb_add_rx_frag_netmem+0x29/0xd0 Code: 90 f3 0f 1e fa 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 41 89 ca 48 89 d7 48 63 ce 8b 90 c0 00 00 00 48 c1 e1 04 48 01 ca 48 03 90 c8 00 00 00 <48> 89 7a 30 44 89 52 3c 44 89 42 38 40 f6 c7 01 75 74 48 89 fa 83 RSP: 0018:ffffa9bec02a8d50 EFLAGS: 00010287 RAX: ffff925b22e80a00 RBX: ffff925ad38d2700 RCX: fffffffe0a0c8000 RDX: ffff9258ea95bac0 RSI: ffff925ae0a0c800 RDI: 0000000000037a40 RBP: 0000000000000024 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000021 R10: 0000000000000848 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffffa9bec02a8e24 R13: ffff925ad8615570 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff925b22e80a00 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff925e47880000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: ffff9258ea95baf0 CR3: 0000000166022004 CR4: 0000000000f72ef0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <IRQ> aq_ring_rx_clean+0x175/0xe60 [atlantic] ? aq_ring_rx_clean+0x14d/0xe60 [atlantic] ? aq_ring_tx_clean+0xdf/0x190 [atlantic] ? kmem_cache_free+0x348/0x450 ? aq_vec_poll+0x81/0x1d0 [atlantic] ? __napi_poll+0x28/0x1c0 ? net_rx_action+0x337/0x420 ``` Changes in v4: - Add Fixes: tag to satisfy patch validation requirements. Changes in v3: - Fix by assuming there will be an extra frag if buff->len > AQ_CFG_RX_HDR_SIZE, then all fragments are accounted for.

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 analysis · high confidence

The Linux kernel's atlantic driver (for Aquantia AQC113 NICs) lacks bounds checking on fragment counts during RX path processing. When receiving large multi-descriptor packets exceeding MAX_SKB_FRAGS (17 fragments), the driver calls skb_add_rx_frag() without validation, causing an out-of-bounds array write in skb_add_rx_frag_netmem() that triggers kernel panic.

MitigationApply the kernel patch which adds fragment count validation by assuming an extra fragment exists when buff->len exceeds AQ_CFG_RX_HDR_SIZE, and reuses existing overflow checks earlier in the code path to prevent buffer overruns.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify Atlantic driver is loaded
    Run 'lsmod | grep atlantic' or check 'modinfo atlantic' to see if the driver module is present in the kernel
    Affected if The atlantic module is loaded and the system uses this driver for network connectivity
  2. Check kernel version
    Run 'uname -r' to get the running kernel version and compare against versions that contain the fix for this bounds checking issue
    Affected if The kernel version is older than the patched version containing the fragment overflow check in the atlantic driver
  3. Identify Atlantic network interfaces
    Run 'ip link show' or check '/sys/class/net/' to find network interfaces using the atlantic driver (ethtool -i <interface> shows driver name)
    Affected if Any active network interface is bound to the atlantic driver
  4. Monitor for large packet reception
    Observe network traffic with 'tcpdump -i <atlantic_interface> -c 100' or check packet size statistics; large packets over MTU size trigger the multi-fragment RX path
    Affected if The system receives large packets that require more than 17 fragments (beyond MAX_SKB_FRAGS)

The environment is affected if the Atlantic network driver is loaded, the kernel version predates the fix, and the system uses an atlantic network interface that can receive large multi-fragment packets.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Apply the kernel patch which adds fragment count validation by assuming an extra fragment exists when buff->len exceeds AQ_CFG_RX_HDR_SIZE, and reuses existing overflow checks earlier in the code path to prevent buffer overruns.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing5.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,790
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,464.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-68301 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-68301 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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