CVE-2025-21710
MEDIUMDescription
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: correct handling of extreme memory squeeze Testing with iperf3 using the "pasta" protocol splicer has revealed a problem in the way tcp handles window advertising in extreme memory squeeze situations. Under memory pressure, a socket endpoint may temporarily advertise a zero-sized window, but this is not stored as part of the socket data. The reasoning behind this is that it is considered a temporary setting which shouldn't influence any further calculations. However, if we happen to stall at an unfortunate value of the current window size, the algorithm selecting a new value will consistently fail to advertise a non-zero window once we have freed up enough memory. This means that this side's notion of the current window size is different from the one last advertised to the peer, causing the latter to not send any data to resolve the sitution. The problem occurs on the iperf3 server side, and the socket in question is a completely regular socket with the default settings for the fedora40 kernel. We do not use SO_PEEK or SO_RCVBUF on the socket. The following excerpt of a logging session, with own comments added, shows more in detail what is happening: // tcp_v4_rcv(->) // tcp_rcv_established(->) [5201<->39222]: ==== Activating log @ net/ipv4/tcp_input.c/tcp_data_queue()/5257 ==== [5201<->39222]: tcp_data_queue(->) [5201<->39222]: DROPPING skb [265600160..265665640], reason: SKB_DROP_REASON_PROTO_MEM [rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200, win_now 131184] [copied_seq 259909392->260034360 (124968), unread 5565800, qlen 85, ofoq 0] [OFO queue: gap: 65480, len: 0] [5201<->39222]: tcp_data_queue(<-) [5201<->39222]: __tcp_transmit_skb(->) [tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160] [5201<->39222]: tcp_select_window(->) [5201<->39222]: (inet_csk(sk)->icsk_ack.pending & ICSK_ACK_NOMEM) ? --> TRUE [tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160] returning 0 [5201<->39222]: tcp_select_window(<-) [5201<->39222]: ADVERTISING WIN 0, ACK_SEQ: 265600160 [5201<->39222]: [__tcp_transmit_skb(<-) [5201<->39222]: tcp_rcv_established(<-) [5201<->39222]: tcp_v4_rcv(<-) // Receive queue is at 85 buffers and we are out of memory. // We drop the incoming buffer, although it is in sequence, and decide // to send an advertisement with a window of zero. // We don't update tp->rcv_wnd and tp->rcv_wup accordingly, which means // we unconditionally shrink the window. [5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->) [5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160 [5201<->39222]: [new_win = 0, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_now = 262368] [5201<->39222]: [new_win >= (2 * win_now) ? --> time_to_ack = 0] [5201<->39222]: NOT calling tcp_send_ack() [tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160] [5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(<-) [rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200, win_now 131184] [copied_seq 260040464->260040464 (0), unread 5559696, qlen 85, ofoq 0] returning 6104 bytes [5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(<-) // After each read, the algorithm for calculating the new receive // window in __tcp_cleanup_rbuf() finds it is too small to advertise // or to update tp->rcv_wnd. // Meanwhile, the peer thinks the window is zero, and will not send // any more data to trigger an update from the interrupt mode side. [5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->) [5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160 [5201<->39222]: [new_win = 262144, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_n ---truncated---
Is your site exposed to CVE-2025-21710?
Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.
CVSS v3.1 Score
Weakness Type (CWE)
Affected Products
| Vendor | Product |
|---|---|
| linux | linux_kernel |
| linux | linux_kernel |
| linux | linux_kernel |
References
Advisories & Patches
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2025-21710? +
How severe is CVE-2025-21710? +
What products are affected by CVE-2025-21710? +
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2025-21710? +
Related Vulnerabilities
A Zigbee Radio Co-Processor (RCP), which is using SiLabs EmberZNet Zigbee stack, was unable to send messages to the host …
Improper locking vulnerability in Softing Industrial Automation GmbH gateways allows infected memory and/or resource leak exposure.This issue affects smartLink HW-PN: …
concurrent-ruby is a modern concurrency tools for Ruby. Prior to 1.3.7, Concurrent::ReadWriteLock#release_write_lock does not verify that the calling thread acquired …
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cifs: Fix locking usage for tcon fields We used to …
[This CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] To manage the …
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfc: llcp: add missing return after LLCP_CLOSED checks In nfc_llcp_recv_hdlc() …