CVE-2025-22023 | usb: xhci: Don't skip on Stopped - Length Invalid

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: xhci: Don't skip on Stopped - Length Invalid Up until commit d56b0b2ab142 ("usb: xhci: ensure skipped isoc TDs are returned when isoc ring is stopped") in v6.11, the driver didn't skip missed isochronous TDs when handling Stoppend and Stopped - Length Invalid events. Instead, it erroneously cleared the skip flag, which would cause the ring to get stuck, as future events won't match the missed TD which is never removed from the queue until it's cancelled. This buggy logic seems to have been in place substantially unchanged since the 3.x series over 10 years ago, which probably speaks first and foremost about relative rarity of this case in normal usage, but by the spec I see no reason why it shouldn't be possible. After d56b0b2ab142, TDs are immediately skipped when handling those Stopped events. This poses a potential problem in case of Stopped - Length Invalid, which occurs either on completed TDs (likely already given back) or Link and No-Op TRBs. Such event won't be recognized as matching any TD (unless it's the rare Link TRB inside a TD) and will result in skipping all pending TDs, giving them back possibly before they are done, risking isoc data loss and maybe UAF by HW. As a compromise, don't skip and don't clear the skip flag on this kind of event. Then the next event will skip missed TDs. A downside of not handling Stopped - Length Invalid on a Link inside a TD is that if the TD is cancelled, its actual length will not be updated to account for TRBs (silently) completed before the TD was stopped. I had no luck producing this sequence of completion events so there is no compelling demonstration of any resulting disaster. It may be a very rare, obscure condition. The sole motivation for this patch is that if such unlikely event does occur, I'd rather risk reporting a cancelled partially done isoc frame as empty than gamble with UAF. This will be fixed more properly by looking at Stopped event's TRB pointer when making skipping decisions, but such rework is unlikely to be backported to v6.12, which will stay around for a few years.

Published: 2025-04-16 Last update: 2026-06-17 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2025-22023 is rated Low Risk (33.1/100): CVSS High severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.16%). 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-2025-22023

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 2026-06-15 0.08% 0.16% +0.08%
2 2026-02-10 0.02% 0.08% +0.06%
3 2025-04-16 0.02%

Full EPSS history (3 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-22023

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
7.8 3.1 HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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:H)
Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way.
Integrity (I:H)
They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
1.8 5.9 [email protected]

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-22023

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-22023

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-22023 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-2025-22023
redhat medium https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-22023
suse high https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-22023/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-22023 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 147, not-affected 142, released 115, needs-triage 2. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-22023

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-22023

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 6.11, < 6.12.22 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.13.10 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.14 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.14:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-22023

cvelogic Threat Intelligence