Skip to content

CVE-2025-21959

Is CVE-2025-21959 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

☆ Watch

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
5.5 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-908
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_conncount: Fully initialize struct nf_conncount_tuple in insert_tree() Since commit b36e4523d4d5 ("netfilter: nf_conncount: fix garbage collection confirm race"), `cpu` and `jiffies32` were introduced to the struct nf_conncount_tuple. The commit made nf_conncount_add() initialize `conn->cpu` and `conn->jiffies32` when allocating the struct. In contrast, count_tree() was not changed to initialize them. By commit 34848d5c896e ("netfilter: nf_conncount: Split insert and traversal"), count_tree() was split and the relevant allocation code now resides in insert_tree(). Initialize `conn->cpu` and `conn->jiffies32` in insert_tree(). BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in find_or_evict net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:117 [inline] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in __nf_conncount_add+0xd9c/0x2850 net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:143 find_or_evict net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:117 [inline] __nf_conncount_add+0xd9c/0x2850 net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:143 count_tree net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:438 [inline] nf_conncount_count+0x82f/0x1e80 net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:521 connlimit_mt+0x7f6/0xbd0 net/netfilter/xt_connlimit.c:72 __nft_match_eval net/netfilter/nft_compat.c:403 [inline] nft_match_eval+0x1a5/0x300 net/netfilter/nft_compat.c:433 expr_call_ops_eval net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:240 [inline] nft_do_chain+0x426/0x2290 net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:288 nft_do_chain_ipv4+0x1a5/0x230 net/netfilter/nft_chain_filter.c:23 nf_hook_entry_hookfn include/linux/netfilter.h:154 [inline] nf_hook_slow+0xf4/0x400 net/netfilter/core.c:626 nf_hook_slow_list+0x24d/0x860 net/netfilter/core.c:663 NF_HOOK_LIST include/linux/netfilter.h:350 [inline] ip_sublist_rcv+0x17b7/0x17f0 net/ipv4/ip_input.c:633 ip_list_rcv+0x9ef/0xa40 net/ipv4/ip_input.c:669 __netif_receive_skb_list_ptype net/core/dev.c:5936 [inline] __netif_receive_skb_list_core+0x15c5/0x1670 net/core/dev.c:5983 __netif_receive_skb_list net/core/dev.c:6035 [inline] netif_receive_skb_list_internal+0x1085/0x1700 net/core/dev.c:6126 netif_receive_skb_list+0x5a/0x460 net/core/dev.c:6178 xdp_recv_frames net/bpf/test_run.c:280 [inline] xdp_test_run_batch net/bpf/test_run.c:361 [inline] bpf_test_run_xdp_live+0x2e86/0x3480 net/bpf/test_run.c:390 bpf_prog_test_run_xdp+0xf1d/0x1ae0 net/bpf/test_run.c:1316 bpf_prog_test_run+0x5e5/0xa30 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:4407 __sys_bpf+0x6aa/0xd90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5813 __do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5902 [inline] __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5900 [inline] __ia32_sys_bpf+0xa0/0xe0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5900 ia32_sys_call+0x394d/0x4180 arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_32.h:358 do_syscall_32_irqs_on arch/x86/entry/common.c:165 [inline] __do_fast_syscall_32+0xb0/0x110 arch/x86/entry/common.c:387 do_fast_syscall_32+0x38/0x80 arch/x86/entry/common.c:412 do_SYSENTER_32+0x1f/0x30 arch/x86/entry/common.c:450 entry_SYSENTER_compat_after_hwframe+0x84/0x8e Uninit was created at: slab_post_alloc_hook mm/slub.c:4121 [inline] slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4164 [inline] kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x915/0xe10 mm/slub.c:4171 insert_tree net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:372 [inline] count_tree net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:450 [inline] nf_conncount_count+0x1415/0x1e80 net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c:521 connlimit_mt+0x7f6/0xbd0 net/netfilter/xt_connlimit.c:72 __nft_match_eval net/netfilter/nft_compat.c:403 [inline] nft_match_eval+0x1a5/0x300 net/netfilter/nft_compat.c:433 expr_call_ops_eval net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:240 [inline] nft_do_chain+0x426/0x2290 net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:288 nft_do_chain_ipv4+0x1a5/0x230 net/netfilter/nft_chain_filter.c:23 nf_hook_entry_hookfn include/linux/netfilter.h:154 [inline] nf_hook_slow+0xf4/0x400 net/netfilter/core.c:626 nf_hook_slow_list+0x24d/0x860 net/netfilter/core.c:663 NF_HOOK_LIST include/linux/netfilter.h:350 [inline] ip_sublist_rcv+0x17b7/0x17f0 net/ipv4/ip_input.c:633 ip_list_rcv+0x9ef/0xa40 net/ip ---truncated---

References

NVD MITRE CVE.org

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-21959
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-21959/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-21959)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-21959"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2025-21959/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2025-21959"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Related CVEs

    Same weakness: CWE-908.