CVE-2025-37805 | sound/virtio: Fix cancel_sync warnings on uninitialized work_structs

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sound/virtio: Fix cancel_sync warnings on uninitialized work_structs Betty reported hitting the following warning: [ 8.709131][ T221] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 221 at kernel/workqueue.c:4182 ... [ 8.713282][ T221] Call trace: [ 8.713365][ T221] __flush_work+0x8d0/0x914 [ 8.713468][ T221] __cancel_work_sync+0xac/0xfc [ 8.713570][ T221] cancel_work_sync+0x24/0x34 [ 8.713667][ T221] virtsnd_remove+0xa8/0xf8 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276] [ 8.713868][ T221] virtsnd_probe+0x48c/0x664 [virtio_snd ab15f34d0dd772f6d11327e08a81d46dc9c36276] [ 8.714035][ T221] virtio_dev_probe+0x28c/0x390 [ 8.714139][ T221] really_probe+0x1bc/0x4c8 ... It seems we're hitting the error path in virtsnd_probe(), which triggers a virtsnd_remove() which iterates over the substreams calling cancel_work_sync() on the elapsed_period work_struct. Looking at the code, from earlier in: virtsnd_probe()->virtsnd_build_devs()->virtsnd_pcm_parse_cfg() We set snd->nsubstreams, allocate the snd->substreams, and if we then hit an error on the info allocation or something in virtsnd_ctl_query_info() fails, we will exit without having initialized the elapsed_period work_struct. When that error path unwinds we then call virtsnd_remove() which as long as the substreams array is allocated, will iterate through calling cancel_work_sync() on the uninitialized work struct hitting this warning. Takashi Iwai suggested this fix, which initializes the substreams structure right after allocation, so that if we hit the error paths we avoid trying to cleanup uninitialized data. Note: I have not yet managed to reproduce the issue myself, so this patch has had limited testing. Feedback or thoughts would be appreciated!

Published: 2025-05-08 Last update: 2025-11-03 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2025-37805 is rated Low Risk (24.1/100): CVSS Medium 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-2025-37805

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 0.05% 0.16% +0.11%
2 2026-03-04 0.02% 0.05% +0.03%
3 2025-05-08 0.02%

Full EPSS history (3 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-37805

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]
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 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-37805

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-37805

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-37805 unimportant priority: Debian including 2 source packages (linux, linux-6.1), 6 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 6. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-37805
redhat low https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-37805
suse medium https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-37805/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-37805 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 168, released 164, needed 45, not-affected 26, needs-triage 2, pending 1. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-37805

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-37805

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel < 5.15.181 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 5.16, < 6.1.136 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.2, < 6.6.89 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.7, < 6.12.26 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.14.5 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-37805

cvelogic Threat Intelligence