VulnerabilityPublished 18 Jun 2025Updated 31 Jul 2026

CVE-2025-38016: Linux kernel · HID: bpf: abort dispatch if device destroyed

Affects Linux kernelSource GCVE Database

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.8 High · fixed in 6.14.0-1011.11~24.04.1 : patch Linux kernel soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.8High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6.14.0-1011.11~24.04.1, 6.14.0-1014.15~24.04.1, 6.11.0-1013.13 +3

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 18 Jun 2025
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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Patches and advisories

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Ubuntu 25.10linux-azure-fde`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-azure-fde?arch=source&distro=questing`Other threats	Affected 6.17.0-1003.3 – 6.17.0-1017.17 10 affected builds	Fixed in–
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-aws-6.14`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-aws-6.14?arch=source&distro=noble`Other threats	Affected <6.14.0-1011.11~24.04.1	Fixed in 6.14.0-1011.11~24.04.1
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-azure-6.11`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-azure-6.11?arch=source&distro=noble`Other threats	Affected 6.11.0-1008.8~24.04.1 – 6.11.0-1018.18~24.04.1 7 affected builds	Fixed in–
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-gcp-6.11`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-gcp-6.11?arch=source&distro=noble`Other threats	Affected 6.11.0-1006.6~24.04.2 – 6.11.0-1017.17~24.04.1 7 affected builds	Fixed in–
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-gcp-6.14`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-gcp-6.14?arch=source&distro=noble`Other threats	Affected <6.14.0-1014.15~24.04.1	Fixed in 6.14.0-1014.15~24.04.1
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-hwe-6.11`pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-hwe-6.11?arch=source&distro=noble`Other threats	Affected 6.11.0-17.17~24.04.2 – 6.11.0-29.29~24.04.1 8 affected builds	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: HID: bpf: abort dispatch if device destroyed The current HID bpf implementation assumes no output report/request will go through it after hid_bpf_destroy_device() has been called. This leads to a bug that unplugging certain types of HID devices causes a cleaned- up SRCU to be accessed. The bug was previously a hidden failure until a recent x86 percpu change [1] made it access not-present pages. The bug will be triggered if the conditions below are met: A) a device under the driver has some LEDs on B) hid_ll_driver->request() is uninplemented (e.g., logitech-djreceiver) If condition A is met, hidinput_led_worker() is always scheduled *after* hid_bpf_destroy_device(). hid_destroy_device ` hid_bpf_destroy_device ` cleanup_srcu_struct(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` hid_remove_device ` ... ` led_classdev_unregister ` led_trigger_set(led_cdev, NULL) ` led_set_brightness(led_cdev, LED_OFF) ` ... ` input_inject_event ` input_event_dispose ` hidinput_input_event ` schedule_work(&hid->led_work) [hidinput_led_worker] This is fine when condition B is not met, where hidinput_led_worker() calls hid_ll_driver->request(). This is the case for most HID drivers, which implement it or use the generic one from usbhid. The driver itself or an underlying driver will then abort processing the request. Otherwise, hidinput_led_worker() tries hid_hw_output_report() and leads to the bug. hidinput_led_worker ` hid_hw_output_report ` dispatch_hid_bpf_output_report ` srcu_read_lock(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` srcu_read_unlock(&hdev->bpf.srcu, idx) The bug has existed since the introduction [2] of dispatch_hid_bpf_output_report(). However, the same bug also exists in dispatch_hid_bpf_raw_requests(), and I've reproduced (no visible effect because of the lack of [1], but confirmed bpf.destroyed == 1) the bug against the commit (i.e., the Fixes:) introducing the function. This is because hidinput_led_worker() falls back to hid_hw_raw_request() when hid_ll_driver->output_report() is uninplemented (e.g., logitech- djreceiver). hidinput_led_worker ` hid_hw_output_report: -ENOSYS ` hid_hw_raw_request ` dispatch_hid_bpf_raw_requests ` srcu_read_lock(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` srcu_read_unlock(&hdev->bpf.srcu, idx) Fix the issue by returning early in the two mentioned functions if hid_bpf has been marked as destroyed. Though dispatch_hid_bpf_device_event() handles input events, and there is no evidence that it may be called after the destruction, the same check, as a safety net, is also added to it to maintain the consistency among all dispatch functions. The impact of the bug on other architectures is unclear. Even if it acts as a hidden failure, this is still dangerous because it corrupts whatever is on the address calculated by SRCU. Thus, CC'ing the stable list. [1]: commit 9d7de2aa8b41 ("x86/percpu/64: Use relative percpu offsets") [2]: commit 9286675a2aed ("HID: bpf: add HID-BPF hooks for hid_hw_output_report")

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…