CVE-2023-52925 | netfilter: nf_tables: don't fail inserts if duplicate has expired

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_tables: don't fail inserts if duplicate has expired nftables selftests fail: run-tests.sh testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0 Expected: 0-2 . 0-3, got: W: [FAILED] ./testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0: got 1 Insertion must ignore duplicate but expired entries. Moreover, there is a strange asymmetry in nft_pipapo_activate: It refetches the current element, whereas the other ->activate callbacks (bitmap, hash, rhash, rbtree) use elem->priv. Same for .remove: other set implementations take elem->priv, nft_pipapo_remove fetches elem->priv, then does a relookup, remove this. I suspect this was the reason for the change that prompted the removal of the expired check in pipapo_get() in the first place, but skipping exired elements there makes no sense to me, this helper is used for normal get requests, insertions (duplicate check) and deactivate callback. In first two cases expired elements must be skipped. For ->deactivate(), this gets called for DELSETELEM, so it seems to me that expired elements should be skipped as well, i.e. delete request should fail with -ENOENT error.

Published: 2025-02-05 Last update: 2025-10-15 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2023-52925 is rated Low Risk (25.5/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.04%). Mandatory action: Monitor for updates and reassess as exploit intelligence or EPSS changes.

Risk is dynamic; we continuously reassess and refresh what is shown on this page as upstream context changes.

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2023-52925

EPSS lead: Daily EPSS estimates relative likelihood of exploitation; percentile ranks this CVE among scored vulnerabilities (higher = more severe relative rank).

# Date Old EPSS score New EPSS score Delta (New - Old)
1 2025-11-21 0.07% 0.04% -0.03%
2 2025-11-18 0.04% 0.07% +0.02%
3 2025-02-06 0.04%

Full EPSS history (3 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2023-52925

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
1.8 3.6 [email protected]
6.2 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:N)
No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
2.5 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2023-52925

OS Trackers for CVE-2023-52925

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2023-52925 unimportant priority: Debian including 1 source packages (linux), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2023-52925
redhat medium https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-52925
suse high https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-52925/
ubuntu medium CVE-2023-52925 medium priority: Ubuntu including 158 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1551 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 1145, ignored 146, not-affected 146, released 92, needed 22. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2023-52925

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2023-52925

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 4.19.316, < 4.20 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 5.4.262, < 5.5 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.4.11 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.4.11:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.5 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.5:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2023-52925

cvelogic Threat Intelligence