Skip to main content
VulnerabilityPublished Updated

CVE-2025-38305: Linux kernel · ptp: remove ptp->n_vclocks check logic in ptp_vclock_in_use()

Affects Linux kernelSource GCVE Database

0

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium · fixed in 5.15.0-1092.99~20.04.1 : update Linux kernel when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score
5.5Medium
How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.
EPSS
0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch
Available – fixed in 5.15.0-1092.99~20.04.1, 5.15.0-1096.105~20.04.1, 5.15.0-1114.123~20.04.1 +60
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Exploitation evidence

  1. Disclosed: evidence found.

    CVE published 10 Jul 2025

  2. Detectable: no evidence on record.

    No public nuclei template indexed

  3. Weaponised: no evidence on record.

    No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB

  4. Exploited in the wild: no evidence on record.

    Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation

  5. Observed by OffSeq 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.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

ProductAffectedFixed in
Ubuntu 25.10linux-azure-fdepkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-azure-fde?arch=source&distro=questingOther threatsAffected
  • 6.17.0-1003.3 – 6.17.0-1017.17
10 affected builds
Fixed in–
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinuxpkg:deb/ubuntu/linux?arch=source&distro=nobleOther threatsAffected
  • <6.8.0-100.100
Fixed in
  • 6.8.0-100.100
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-awspkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-aws?arch=source&distro=nobleOther threatsAffected
  • <6.8.0-1046.49
Fixed in
  • 6.8.0-1046.49
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-aws-6.14pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-aws-6.14?arch=source&distro=nobleOther threatsAffected
  • <6.14.0-1013.13~24.04.1
Fixed in
  • 6.14.0-1013.13~24.04.1
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-azurepkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-azure?arch=source&distro=nobleOther threatsAffected
  • <6.8.0-1046.52
Fixed in
  • 6.8.0-1046.52
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSlinux-azure-6.11pkg:deb/ubuntu/linux-azure-6.11?arch=source&distro=nobleOther threatsAffected
  • 6.11.0-1008.8~24.04.1 – 6.11.0-1018.18~24.04.1
7 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: ptp: remove ptp->n_vclocks check logic in ptp_vclock_in_use() There is no disagreement that we should check both ptp->is_virtual_clock and ptp->n_vclocks to check if the ptp virtual clock is in use. However, when we acquire ptp->n_vclocks_mux to read ptp->n_vclocks in ptp_vclock_in_use(), we observe a recursive lock in the call trace starting from n_vclocks_store(). ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.15.0-rc6 #1 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- syz.0.1540/13807 is trying to acquire lock: ffff888035a24868 (&ptp->n_vclocks_mux){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: ptp_vclock_in_use drivers/ptp/ptp_private.h:103 [inline] ffff888035a24868 (&ptp->n_vclocks_mux){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: ptp_clock_unregister+0x21/0x250 drivers/ptp/ptp_clock.c:415 but task is already holding lock: ffff888030704868 (&ptp->n_vclocks_mux){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: n_vclocks_store+0xf1/0x6d0 drivers/ptp/ptp_sysfs.c:215 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&ptp->n_vclocks_mux); lock(&ptp->n_vclocks_mux); *** DEADLOCK *** .... ============================================ The best way to solve this is to remove the logic that checks ptp->n_vclocks in ptp_vclock_in_use(). The reason why this is appropriate is that any path that uses ptp->n_vclocks must unconditionally check if ptp->n_vclocks is greater than 0 before unregistering vclocks, and all functions are already written this way. And in the function that uses ptp->n_vclocks, we already get ptp->n_vclocks_mux before unregistering vclocks. Therefore, we need to remove the redundant check for ptp->n_vclocks in ptp_vclock_in_use() to prevent recursive locking.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…