dbcve.org
Out-of-bounds ReadWeakness · CWE-125

CVE-2025-8067

HIGH · 8.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-08-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
90/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
A flaw was found in the Udisks daemon, where it allows unprivileged users to create loop devices using the D-BUS system. This is achieved via the loop device handler, which handles requests sent through the D-BUS interface. As two of the parameters of this handle, it receives the file descriptor list and index specifying the file where the loop device should be backed. The function itself validates the index value to ensure it isn't bigger than the maximum value allowed. However, it fails to validate the lower bound, allowing the index parameter to be a negative value. Under these circumstances, an attacker can cause the UDisks daemon to crash or perform a local privilege escalation by gaining access to files owned by privileged users.

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 Udisks daemon's loop device handler fails to validate the lower bound of the index parameter when processing D-BUS requests, allowing negative values. This improper input validation enables unprivileged attackers to either crash the daemon or perform local privilege escalation by accessing files owned by privileged users.

MitigationAdd proper lower bound validation (>= 0) for the index parameter in the loop device handler function to reject negative values before processing.

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/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. Identify udisks package version
    Run 'dpkg -l udisks' or 'rpm -q udisks' or check your system's package manager for the installed udisks version
    Affected if the installed version falls within affected ranges or cannot be determined and the package is present
  2. Verify udisks daemon is running
    Run 'systemctl status udisks' or 'ps aux | grep udisksd' to check if the udisks daemon process is active
    Affected if the daemon is running and the version is vulnerable
  3. Check D-BUS policy for loop device interface
    Examine /etc/dbus-1/system.d/*.conf or use 'busctl' to inspect the org.freedesktop.UDisks2.Loop interface policy and determine if unprivileged users can call the relevant methods
    Affected if unrestricted D-BUS access exists for the loop device interface allowing arbitrary index values
  4. Inspect loop device handler configuration
    Check udisks configuration files in /etc/udisks2/ for any loop-related settings, and review D-BUS method calls like 'SetBackingFile' that accept index parameters
    Affected if loop device configuration is present and accessible via D-BUS without proper access controls
  5. Test for the vulnerability via D-BUS
    If you have access, use 'gdbus' or 'busctl' to call the loop device handler with a negative index value and observe if it accepts it or causes unexpected behavior
    Affected if the handler accepts negative index values without error or validation failure

You are affected if udisks is installed and running, the D-BUS loop device interface is accessible to unprivileged users, and the installed version lacks the lower-bound validation fix for the index parameter.

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

Add proper lower bound validation (>= 0) for the index parameter in the loop device handler function to reject negative values before processing.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-8067 — 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-2025-8067 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