CVE-2025-37799

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Important Important Impact What does this mean?
7.1 CVSS v3 Base Score

Description

The MITRE CVE dictionary describes this issue as

In 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.

Statement

A bug in the vmxnet3 XDP path caused uninitialized kernel memory to be leaked into network packets, due to incorrect packet size handling. This results in a kernel memory disclosure to remote systems, affecting confidentiality but not system stability.

RHEL versions prior to 9.5 are not affected by this vulnerability, as the vulnerable code is not present in those releases.

Mitigation

To mitigate this issue, prevent module vmxnet3 from being loaded. Please see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/41278 for how to blacklist a kernel module to prevent it from loading automatically.

Additional Information

External References

Content from www.cve.org is not included.https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37799

Content from nvd.nist.gov is not included.https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-37799

Content from lore.kernel.org is not included.https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025050349-CVE-2025-37799-bb83@gregkh/T

Affected Packages and Issued Red Hat Security Errata

Products / Services Components State Errata
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 kernel Fixed RHSA-2025:10371
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel-rt Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel-rt Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel Fixed RHSA-2025:10379
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kpatch-patch Fixed RHSA-2025:10674
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel-rt Not affected
Unless explicitly stated as not affected, all previous versions of packages in any minor update stream of a product listed here should be assumed vulnerable, although may not have been subject to full analysis.

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

Important note

CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authorities (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications ).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown Red Hat NVD
CVSS v3 Base Score 7.1 5.5
Attack Vector Network Local
Attack Complexity Low Low
Privileges Required Low Low
User Interaction None None
Scope Unchanged Unchanged
Confidentiality Impact High None
Integrity Impact Low None
Availability Impact None High

CVSS v3 Vector

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

 For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
  • "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
  • "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

 A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

 A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
  • Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.

What is a mitigation?

 A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

 The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

 In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our This content is not included.Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?

 When a product is listed as "Out of Support Scope", it means a vulnerability with the impact level assigned to this CVE is no longer covered by its current support lifecycle phase. The product has been identified to contain the impacted component, but analysis to determine whether it is affected or not by this vulnerability was not performed. The product should be assumed to be affected. Customers are advised to apply any mitigation options documented on this page, consider removing or disabling the impacted component, or upgrade to a supported version of the product that has an update available.