CVE-2025-38660

Description

From CVE.org

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: [ceph] parse_longname(): strrchr() expects NUL-terminated string ... and parse_longname() is not guaranteed that. That's the reason why it uses kmemdup_nul() to build the argument for kstrtou64(); the problem is, kstrtou64() is not the only thing that need it. Just get a NUL-terminated copy of the entire thing and be done with that...

Statement

parse_longname() called strrchr() on a buffer that wasn’t guaranteed to be NUL-terminated, which could lead to out-of-bounds reads and kernel faults when parsing encrypted “long” snapshot names. The fix makes a NUL-terminated copy of the full input and avoids transient sub-copies, ensuring safe delimiter search and numeric parsing. Practically, a malicious or misconfigured Ceph server/export supplying crafted snapshot names could trigger a client kernel crash.

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 HatNVDcve.org
Base Score5.95.59.8
Attack VectorNetworkLocalNetwork
Attack ComplexityHighLowLow
Privileges RequiredNoneLowNone
User InteractionNoneNoneNone
ScopeUnchangedUnchangedUnchanged
ConfidentialityNoneNoneHigh
Integrity ImpactNoneNoneHigh
Availability ImpactHighHighHigh

Vector

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

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

Understanding the Weakness (CWE)

Confidentiality,Integrity,Availability

Technical Impact: Read Memory; Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands

The case of an omitted null character is the most dangerous of the possible issues. This will almost certainly result in information disclosure, and possibly a buffer overflow condition, which may be exploited to execute arbitrary code.

Confidentiality,Integrity,Availability

Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; Read Memory; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)

If a null character is omitted from a string, then most string-copying functions will read data until they locate a null character, even outside of the intended boundaries of the string. This could: cause a crash due to a segmentation fault cause sensitive adjacent memory to be copied and sent to an outsider trigger a buffer overflow when the copy is being written to a fixed-size buffer.

Integrity,Availability

Technical Impact: Modify Memory; DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Misplaced null characters may result in any number of security problems. The biggest issue is a subset of buffer overflow, and write-what-where conditions, where data corruption occurs from the writing of a null character over valid data, or even instructions. A randomly placed null character may put the system into an undefined state, and therefore make it prone to crashing. A misplaced null character may corrupt other data in memory.

Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control,Other

Technical Impact: Alter Execution Logic; Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands

Should the null character corrupt the process flow, or affect a flag controlling access, it may lead to logical errors which allow for the execution of arbitrary code.

Frequently Asked Questions

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.