CVE-2024-25741VulnerabilityPublished 12 Feb 2024Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-25741: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 24% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Linux kernel through 6.7.4

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 12 Feb 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

1. Monitor for official Linux kernel updates addressing CVE-2024-25741 and apply patches promptly once available. 2. If patching is not immediately possible, disable the USB gadget printer function in the kernel configuration or blacklist the f_printer module to prevent usage of the vulnerable code path. 3. Restrict local access to systems running affected kernel versions to trusted users only, minimizing the risk of local exploitation. 4. Employ strict access controls and monitoring on devices that use USB gadget functionality, particularly in embedded or industrial environments. 5. Conduct audits of Linux kernel versions in use across the organization to identify systems running versions up to 6.7.4 and assess exposure. 6. Implement system integrity monitoring to detect unusual crashes or USB subsystem errors that may indicate exploitation attempts. 7. Educate system administrators about the vulnerability and the importance of limiting local privilege escalation and access.

Description

printer_write in drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_printer.c in the Linux kernel through 6.7.4 does not properly call usb_ep_queue, which might allow attackers to cause a denial of service or have unspecified other impact.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact is on system availability where the Linux kernel USB gadget printer function is in use. This could affect embedded devices, industrial control systems, or specialized hardware that emulate USB printers via the Linux USB gadget framework. A denial of service could disrupt printing services or cause device instability, impacting operational continuity. Since the vulnerability requires local access and low privileges, insider threats or compromised local accounts pose a risk. The lack of impact on confidentiality or integrity limits data breach concerns, but availability disruptions could affect manufacturing, logistics, or administrative processes relying on these devices. Organizations with extensive Linux deployments, especially in sectors like manufacturing, telecommunications, and research institutions, may face operational risks. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat but patching or mitigation is advised to prevent future exploitation.

CWE-703Improper Check or Handling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly anticipate or handle exceptional conditions that rarely occur during normal operation of the product.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Nov 2025, 23:56 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-703

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats