> CVE-2025-38351

« BACK_TO_HOME
PUBLISHED
2025-07-19 12:15
MODIFIED
2025-08-28 15:15
EPSS (Prob. Exploit)
0.19%
Top 91.6%
DATA SOURCES:
NVD 🔗 2025-10-18 RED HAT 🔗 2025-10-18 CVE PROJECT 🔗 2026-01-19 FIRST EPSS 🔗 2026-10-25 MSRC 🔗 2026-06-01

> DESCRIPTION

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: x86/hyper-v: Skip non-canonical addresses during PV TLB flush In KVM guests with Hyper-V hypercalls enabled, the hypercalls HVCALL_FLUSH_VIRTUAL_ADDRESS_LIST and HVCALL_FLUSH_VIRTUAL_ADDRESS_LIST_EX allow a guest to request invalidation of portions of a virtual TLB. For this, the hypercall parameter includes a list of GVAs that are supposed to be invalidated. However, when non-canonical GVAs are passed, there is currently no filtering in place and they are eventually passed to checked invocations of INVVPID on Intel / INVLPGA on AMD. While AMD's INVLPGA silently ignores non-canonical addresses (effectively a no-op), Intel's INVVPID explicitly signals VM-Fail and ultimately triggers the WARN_ONCE in invvpid_error(): invvpid failed: ext=0x0 vpid=1 gva=0xaaaaaaaaaaaaa000 WARNING: CPU: 6 PID: 326 at arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c:482 invvpid_error+0x91/0xa0 [kvm_intel] Modules linked in: kvm_intel kvm 9pnet_virtio irqbypass fuse CPU: 6 UID: 0 PID: 326 Comm: kvm-vm Not tainted 6.15.0 #14 PREEMPT(voluntary) RIP: 0010:invvpid_error+0x91/0xa0 [kvm_intel] Call Trace: vmx_flush_tlb_gva+0x320/0x490 [kvm_intel] kvm_hv_vcpu_flush_tlb+0x24f/0x4f0 [kvm] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0x3013/0x5810 [kvm] Hyper-V documents that invalid GVAs (those that are beyond a partition's GVA space) are to be ignored. While not completely clear whether this ruling also applies to non-canonical GVAs, it is likely fine to make that assumption, and manual testing on Azure confirms "real" Hyper-V interprets the specification in the same way. Skip non-canonical GVAs when processing the list of address to avoid tripping the INVVPID failure. Alternatively, KVM could filter out "bad" GVAs before inserting into the FIFO, but practically speaking the only downside of pushing validation to the final processing is that doing so is suboptimal for the guest, and no well-behaved guest will request TLB flushes for non-canonical addresses.

> AFFECTED_PRODUCTS

Red Hat - Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
Version: 5.14.0

> RED HAT SECURITY ADVISORIES

Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security update
An update for kernel is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9. Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Moderate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CV...
Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security update
An update for kernel is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10. Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Moderate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (C...
Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security update
An update for kernel is now available for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9. Red Hat Product Security has rated this update as having a security impact of Moderate. A Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CV...

> RED HAT SEVERITY ASSESSMENT

THREAT SEVERITY
Moderate

> HISTORIQUE DES MODIFICATIONS

Première apparition
19/07/2025 12:15
Source: NVD
📊 ENRICHISSEMENT 18/10/2025 15:06
CVEPROJECT
Champ modifié: CVE Project
Ancienne valeur:
Non
Nouvelle valeur:
Oui
📊 ENRICHISSEMENT 18/10/2025 12:10
REDHAT
Champ modifié: Sévérité Red Hat
Ancienne valeur:
N/A
Nouvelle valeur:
{ "threat_severity": "Moderate", "severity_scale": null }
📊 ENRICHISSEMENT 18/10/2025 12:10
REDHAT
Champ modifié: Red Hat
Ancienne valeur:
Non
Nouvelle valeur:
Oui
Total des modifications: 3 Dernière mise à jour: 1 year ago
« BACK_TO_HOME