CVE-2025-37756
Description
From CVE.org
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: tls: explicitly disallow disconnect syzbot discovered that it can disconnect a TLS socket and then run into all sort of unexpected corner cases. I have a vague recollection of Eric pointing this out to us a long time ago. Supporting disconnect is really hard, for one thing if offload is enabled we'd need to wait for all packets to be _acked_. Disconnect is not commonly used, disallow it. The immediate problem syzbot run into is the warning in the strp, but that's just the easiest bug to trigger: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 5834 at net/tls/tls_strp.c:486 tls_strp_msg_load+0x72e/0xa80 net/tls/tls_strp.c:486 RIP: 0010:tls_strp_msg_load+0x72e/0xa80 net/tls/tls_strp.c:486 Call Trace: <TASK> tls_rx_rec_wait+0x280/0xa60 net/tls/tls_sw.c:1363 tls_sw_recvmsg+0x85c/0x1c30 net/tls/tls_sw.c:2043 inet6_recvmsg+0x2c9/0x730 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:678 sock_recvmsg_nosec net/socket.c:1023 [inline] sock_recvmsg+0x109/0x280 net/socket.c:1045 __sys_recvfrom+0x202/0x380 net/socket.c:2237
Statement
A low severity flaw was found in the Linux kernel's kernel TLS (kTLS) implementation, affecting Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 and 10 (kernel and kernel-rt) and Red Hat In-Vehicle OS 1. The kTLS receive path did not explicitly disallow disconnecting a TLS socket, so a local user with access to a kTLS socket could issue a disconnect and then drive the socket into unexpected corner cases; the easiest problem to trigger is a kernel WARNING in the TLS strparser receive path (tls_strp_msg_load). Red Hat assesses the impact of this flaw as Low severity because exploitation requires local access with local privileges and the demonstrated consequence is limited to availability impact through a kernel warning in a rarely used code path. This is lower than the upstream CVEORG score of 7.8 (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), which assumes high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact that the demonstrated issue does not establish; NIST scores it 5.5 (moderate). Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 and 7 long-life streams are not affected because the vulnerable code is not present, and the RHEL 8 z-streams are out of support scope. The upstream fix explicitly disallows disconnect on kTLS sockets; this fix is currently deferred for the affected streams, and the residual risk is that a local user could trigger a kernel warning or other unexpected behavior in the kTLS receive path.
Mitigation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert: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 Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 3.3 | 5.5 | 7.8 |
| Attack Vector | Local | Local | Local |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Low | Low |
| Privileges Required | Low | Low | Low |
| User Interaction | None | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | None | None | High |
| Integrity Impact | None | None | High |
| Availability Impact | Low | High | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
An attacker could provide unexpected values and cause a program crash or arbitrary control of resource allocation, leading to excessive consumption of resources such as memory and CPU.
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory; Read Files or Directories
An attacker could read confidential data if they are able to control resource references.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Modify Memory; Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
An attacker could use malicious input to modify data or possibly alter control flow in unexpected ways, including arbitrary command execution.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
