CVSS base score: 8.8 (High) vendor CNA · v3.1
Score assigned by the vendor's own CVE Numbering Authority (CNA); CISA's Vulnrichment program adds a score only when the CNA omits one. Vulnrichment source record →
Vendor: Linux Product: Linux
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: HID: logitech-hidpp: Fix kernel crash on receiver USB disconnect hidpp_connect_event() has *four* time-of-check vs time-of-use (TOCTOU) races when it races with itself. hidpp_connect_event() primarily runs from a workqueue but it also runs on probe() and if a "device-connected" packet is received by the hw when the thread running hidpp_connect_event() from probe() is waiting on the hw, then a second thread running hidpp_connect_event() will be started from the workqueue. This opens the following races (note the below code is simplified): 1. Retrieving + printing the protocol (harmless race): if (!hidpp->protocol_major) { hidpp_root_get_protocol_version() hidpp->protocol_major = response.rap.params[0]; } We can actually see this race hit in the dmesg in the abrt output attached to rhbz#2227968: [ 3064.624215] logitech-hidpp-device 0003:046D:4071.0049: HID++ 4.5 device connected. [ 3064.658184] logitech-hidpp-device 0003:046D:4071.0049: HID++ 4.5 device connected. Testing with extra logging added has shown that after this the 2 threads take turn grabbing the hw access mutex (send_mutex) so they ping-pong through all the other TOCTOU cases managing to hit all of them: 2. Updating the name to the HIDPP name (harmless race): if (hidpp->name == hdev->name) { ... hidpp->name = new_name; } 3. Initializing the power_supply class for the battery (problematic!): hidpp_initialize_battery() { if (hidpp->battery.ps) return 0; probe_battery(); /* Blocks, threads take turns executing this */ hidpp->battery.desc.properties = devm_kmemdup(dev, hidpp_battery_props, cnt, GFP_KERNEL); hidpp->battery.ps = devm_power_supply_register(&hidpp->hid_dev->dev, &hidpp->battery.desc, cfg); } 4. Creating delayed input_device (potentially problematic): if (hidpp->delayed_input) return; hidpp->delayed_input = hidpp_allocate_input(hdev); The really big problem here is 3. Hitting the race leads to the following sequence: hidpp->battery.desc.properties = devm_kmemdup(dev, hidpp_battery_props, cnt, GFP_KERNEL); hidpp->battery.ps = devm_power_supply_register(&hidpp->hid_dev->dev, &hidpp->battery.desc, cfg); ... hidpp->battery.desc.properties = devm_kmemdup(dev, hidpp_battery_props, cnt, GFP_KERNEL); hidpp->battery.ps = devm_power_supply_register(&hidpp->hid_dev->dev, &hidpp->battery.desc, cfg); So now we have registered 2 power supplies for the same battery, which looks a bit weird from userspace's pov but this is not even the really big problem. Notice how: 1. This is all devm-maganaged 2. The hidpp->battery.desc struct is shared between the 2 power supplies 3. hidpp->battery.desc.properties points to the result from the second devm_kmemdup() This causes a use after free scenario on USB disconnect of the receiver: 1. The last registered power supply class device gets unregistered 2. The memory from the last devm_kmemdup() call gets freed, hidpp->battery.desc.properties now points to freed memory 3. The first registered power supply class device gets unregistered, this involves sending a remove uevent to userspace which invokes power_supply_uevent() to fill the uevent data 4. power_supply_uevent() uses hidpp->battery.desc.properties which now points to freed memory leading to backtraces like this one: Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffffb2140e017f08 ... Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: Workqueue: usb_hub_wq hub_event Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: RIP: 0010:power_supply_uevent+0xee/0x1d0 ... Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30 Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: ? power_supply_uevent+0xee/0x1d0 Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: ? power_supply_uevent+0x10d/0x1d0 Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: dev_uevent+0x10f/0x2d0 Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: kobject_uevent_env+0x291/0x680 Sep 22 20:01:35 eric kernel: ---truncated---
No mentions found in monitored research blogs or news feeds.
| Date | Advisory | Issuer |
|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-14 | ICSA-25-226-15: Siemens SINEC OS | CISA |
Each milestone comes from a different source, so gaps between them are gaps in what those sources publish, not evidence that nothing happened. EPSS history for this CVE holds 8 points from 2026-11-05, tracked daily from 2026-11-05; earlier points are weekly, which dates a spike to within a week. Peak probability 0.3% on 2026-11-05.
Check whether a specific version is affected →
What each source publishes about which product versions carry this vulnerability, kept as written rather than merged. Absence here means no source has published applicability data, not that nothing is affected.
Coverage across public collections only: Nuclei and OpenVAS NVT (scan);
Snort and Suricata ET Open (network); Sigma and YARA (host/SIEM);
Metasploit, Exploit-DB, public GitHub repositories and NVD exploit references (exploit). Absence
here means nothing public was found, not that detection is impossible.
GitHub PoC repositories are collected automatically by
PoC-in-GitHub (CC0) and filtered to repositories that are
still online, contain code, and are starred or at least two weeks old. They are
still not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware. Treat
them as evidence that code was published, not as code to run.
NVD exploit references are links NVD's analysts tag as exploits; they confirm
an exploit was referenced but carry no date. This product uses data from the
NVD but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
OpenVAS coverage derives from the Greenbone Community Feed, made available
under the Open Database License (ODbL) v1.0;
its individual Vulnerability Tests are licensed
GNU GPL v2.
No exploit-tool sightings recorded for this CVE.
Metasploit is dated by the first commit of the module file, Exploit-DB by its publication date, and GitHub repositories by their creation date. GitHub PoC repositories are filtered (still online, contain code, starred or at least two weeks old) but not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware, so they show that code was published, not that it works or is safe to run. Evidence tiers are explained on the About page.
Where the distribution has shipped a fix, and in which version. Green means the release has resolved it, amber that it is still open. Data from the Debian Security Tracker, used under Debian's MIT / GPLv2+ terms. Debian is upstream of several other distributions, so a fix here often precedes theirs.
| If the asset is | Remediate within | Table 1 row |
|---|---|---|
| Publicly exposed | 60 days | 8 of 16 |
| Not publicly exposed | Fix on system upgrade | 16 of 16 |
BOD 26-04 replaced the single KEV deadline of BOD 22-01 with four inputs: whether the asset is publicly exposed, KEV status, whether exploitation is automatable, and technical impact. Exposure belongs to each agency's asset, not to the CVE, so both outcomes are shown. Automatable and technical impact come from the CISA assessment above. Days are calendar days; for KEV entries the clock starts on the date it was added, and otherwise when the agency identifies the vulnerability on an asset. Agencies make the final exposure call asset by asset, and may set shorter timelines.
CVE.org record → NVD entry → FortiGuard Labs → Rapid7 AttackerKB →