CVE-2025-38016 | HID: bpf: abort dispatch if device destroyed

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: HID: bpf: abort dispatch if device destroyed The current HID bpf implementation assumes no output report/request will go through it after hid_bpf_destroy_device() has been called. This leads to a bug that unplugging certain types of HID devices causes a cleaned- up SRCU to be accessed. The bug was previously a hidden failure until a recent x86 percpu change [1] made it access not-present pages. The bug will be triggered if the conditions below are met: A) a device under the driver has some LEDs on B) hid_ll_driver->request() is uninplemented (e.g., logitech-djreceiver) If condition A is met, hidinput_led_worker() is always scheduled *after* hid_bpf_destroy_device(). hid_destroy_device ` hid_bpf_destroy_device ` cleanup_srcu_struct(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` hid_remove_device ` ... ` led_classdev_unregister ` led_trigger_set(led_cdev, NULL) ` led_set_brightness(led_cdev, LED_OFF) ` ... ` input_inject_event ` input_event_dispose ` hidinput_input_event ` schedule_work(&hid->led_work) [hidinput_led_worker] This is fine when condition B is not met, where hidinput_led_worker() calls hid_ll_driver->request(). This is the case for most HID drivers, which implement it or use the generic one from usbhid. The driver itself or an underlying driver will then abort processing the request. Otherwise, hidinput_led_worker() tries hid_hw_output_report() and leads to the bug. hidinput_led_worker ` hid_hw_output_report ` dispatch_hid_bpf_output_report ` srcu_read_lock(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` srcu_read_unlock(&hdev->bpf.srcu, idx) The bug has existed since the introduction [2] of dispatch_hid_bpf_output_report(). However, the same bug also exists in dispatch_hid_bpf_raw_requests(), and I've reproduced (no visible effect because of the lack of [1], but confirmed bpf.destroyed == 1) the bug against the commit (i.e., the Fixes:) introducing the function. This is because hidinput_led_worker() falls back to hid_hw_raw_request() when hid_ll_driver->output_report() is uninplemented (e.g., logitech- djreceiver). hidinput_led_worker ` hid_hw_output_report: -ENOSYS ` hid_hw_raw_request ` dispatch_hid_bpf_raw_requests ` srcu_read_lock(&hdev->bpf.srcu) ` srcu_read_unlock(&hdev->bpf.srcu, idx) Fix the issue by returning early in the two mentioned functions if hid_bpf has been marked as destroyed. Though dispatch_hid_bpf_device_event() handles input events, and there is no evidence that it may be called after the destruction, the same check, as a safety net, is also added to it to maintain the consistency among all dispatch functions. The impact of the bug on other architectures is unclear. Even if it acts as a hidden failure, this is still dangerous because it corrupts whatever is on the address calculated by SRCU. Thus, CC'ing the stable list. [1]: commit 9d7de2aa8b41 ("x86/percpu/64: Use relative percpu offsets") [2]: commit 9286675a2aed ("HID: bpf: add HID-BPF hooks for hid_hw_output_report")

Published: 2025-06-18 Last update: 2025-11-14 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2025-38016 is rated Low Risk (22.9/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.02%). 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-2025-38016

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 2025-06-18 0.02%

Full EPSS history (1 record total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-38016

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]

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-38016

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-38016

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-38016 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-2025-38016
redhat low https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-38016
suse high CVE-2025-38016 severity important: SUSE including 52 source package names (cluster-md-kmp-default, dlm-kmp-default, …), 292 product×package rows across 53 product lines (SLES-LTSS-TERADATA 15 SP2, SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7, … (53 product lines)): Known Not Affected 266, Fixed 26. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-38016/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-38016 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 162, not-affected 135, released 107, needs-triage 2. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-38016

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-38016

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 6.11, < 6.12.30 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.14.8 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-38016

cvelogic Threat Intelligence