CVE-2025-22023

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: xhci: Don't skip on Stopped - Length Invalid Up until commit d56b0b2ab142 ("usb: xhci: ensure skipped isoc TDs are returned when isoc ring is stopped") in v6.11, the driver didn't skip missed isochronous TDs when handling Stoppend and Stopped - Length Invalid events. Instead, it erroneously cleared the skip flag, which would cause the ring to get stuck, as future events won't match the missed TD which is never removed from the queue until it's cancelled. This buggy logic seems to have been in place substantially unchanged since the 3.x series over 10 years ago, which probably speaks first and foremost about relative rarity of this case in normal usage, but by the spec I see no reason why it shouldn't be possible. After d56b0b2ab142, TDs are immediately skipped when handling those Stopped events. This poses a potential problem in case of Stopped - Length Invalid, which occurs either on completed TDs (likely already given back) or Link and No-Op TRBs. Such event won't be recognized as matching any TD (unless it's the rare Link TRB inside a TD) and will result in skipping all pending TDs, giving them back possibly before they are done, risking isoc data loss and maybe UAF by HW. As a compromise, don't skip and don't clear the skip flag on this kind of event. Then the next event will skip missed TDs. A downside of not handling Stopped - Length Invalid on a Link inside a TD is that if the TD is cancelled, its actual length will not be updated to account for TRBs (silently) completed before the TD was stopped. I had no luck producing this sequence of completion events so there is no compelling demonstration of any resulting disaster. It may be a very rare, obscure condition. The sole motivation for this patch is that if such unlikely event does occur, I'd rather risk reporting a cancelled partially done isoc frame as empty than gamble with UAF. This will be fixed more properly by looking at Stopped event's TRB pointer when making skipping decisions, but such rework is unlikely to be backported to v6.12, which will stay around for a few years.

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2025-04-16 11:15 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 08:44 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 7.8 HIGH (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2025-04-16 11:15 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 08:44 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Weakness

CWE-416 · Use after free

Record status

Analyzed

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 6.12.22
• Linux Kernel < 6.13.10
• Linux Kernel 6.14

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.8

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

High

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2025-22023.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2025-22023. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge