Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: xhci: Apply the link...
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
usb: xhci: Apply the link chain quirk on NEC isoc endpoints
Two clearly different specimens of NEC uPD720200 (one with start/stop
bug, one without) were seen to cause IOMMU faults after some Missed
Service Errors. Faulting address is immediately after a transfer ring
segment and patched dynamic debug messages revealed that the MSE was
received when waiting for a TD near the end of that segment:
[ 1.041954] xhci_hcd: Miss service interval error for slot 1 ep 2 expected TD DMA ffa08fe0
[ 1.042120] xhci_hcd: AMD-Vi: Event logged [IO_PAGE_FAULT domain=0x0005 address=0xffa09000 flags=0x0000]
[ 1.042146] xhci_hcd: AMD-Vi: Event logged [IO_PAGE_FAULT domain=0x0005 address=0xffa09040 flags=0x0000]
It gets even funnier if the next page is a ring segment accessible to
the HC. Below, it reports MSE in segment at ff1e8000, plows through a
zero-filled page at ff1e9000 and starts reporting events for TRBs in
page at ff1ea000 every microframe, instead of jumping to seg ff1e6000.
[ 7.041671] xhci_hcd: Miss service interval error for slot 1 ep 2 expected TD DMA ff1e8fe0
[ 7.041999] xhci_hcd: Miss service interval error for slot 1 ep 2 expected TD DMA ff1e8fe0
[ 7.042011] xhci_hcd: WARN: buffer overrun event for slot 1 ep 2 on endpoint
[ 7.042028] xhci_hcd: All TDs skipped for slot 1 ep 2. Clear skip flag.
[ 7.042134] xhci_hcd: WARN: buffer overrun event for slot 1 ep 2 on endpoint
[ 7.042138] xhci_hcd: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 31
[ 7.042144] xhci_hcd: Looking for event-dma 00000000ff1ea040 trb-start 00000000ff1e6820 trb-end 00000000ff1e6820
[ 7.042259] xhci_hcd: WARN: buffer overrun event for slot 1 ep 2 on endpoint
[ 7.042262] xhci_hcd: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 31
[ 7.042266] xhci_hcd: Looking for event-dma 00000000ff1ea050 trb-start 00000000ff1e6820 trb-end 00000000ff1e6820
At some point completion events change from Isoch Buffer Overrun to
Short Packet and the HC finally finds cycle bit mismatch in ff1ec000.
[ 7.098130] xhci_hcd: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 13
[ 7.098132] xhci_hcd: Looking for event-dma 00000000ff1ecc50 trb-start 00000000ff1e6820 trb-end 00000000ff1e6820
[ 7.098254] xhci_hcd: ERROR Transfer event TRB DMA ptr not part of current TD ep_index 2 comp_code 13
[ 7.098256] xhci_hcd: Looking for event-dma 00000000ff1ecc60 trb-start 00000000ff1e6820 trb-end 00000000ff1e6820
[ 7.098379] xhci_hcd: Overrun event on slot 1 ep 2
It's possible that data from the isochronous device were written to
random buffers of pending TDs on other endpoints (either IN or OUT),
other devices or even other HCs in the same IOMMU domain.
Lastly, an error from a different USB device on another HC. Was it
caused by the above? I don't know, but it may have been. The disk
was working without any other issues and generated PCIe traffic to
starve the NEC of upstream BW and trigger those MSEs. The two HCs
shared one x1 slot by means of a commercial "PCIe splitter" board.
[ 7.162604] usb 10-2: reset SuperSpeed USB device number 3 using xhci_hcd
[ 7.178990] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdb] tag#0 UNKNOWN(0x2003) Result: hostbyte=0x07 driverbyte=DRIVER_OK cmd_age=0s
[ 7.179001] sd 9:0:0:0: [sdb] tag#0 CDB: opcode=0x28 28 00 04 02 ae 00 00 02 00 00
[ 7.179004] I/O error, dev sdb, sector 67284480 op 0x0:(READ) flags 0x80700 phys_seg 5 prio class 0
Fortunately, it appears that this ridiculous bug is avoided by setting
the chain bit of Link TRBs on isochronous rings. Other ancient HCs are
known which also expect the bit to be set and they ignore Link TRBs if
it's not. Reportedly, 0.95 spec guaranteed that the bit is set.
The bandwidth-starved NEC HC running a 32KB/uframe UVC endpoint reports
tens of MSEs per second and runs into the bug within seconds. Chaining
Link TRBs allows the same workload to run for many minutes, many times.
No ne
---truncated---
Impact
A write operation targets a memory location beyond the intended buffer boundary. Typical impact: memory corruption, crash, or arbitrary code execution.
CVE-2025-22022 has a CVSS score of 7.8 (High). The vector is requires local access, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. No fixed version is listed yet, so configuration controls and monitoring matter more in the interim.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2025-22022? CVE-2025-22022 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability. No fixed version is listed yet. A write operation targets a memory location beyond the intended buffer boundary.
- How severe is CVE-2025-22022? CVE-2025-22022 has a CVSS score of 7.8 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2025-22022? No fixed version is listed for CVE-2025-22022 yet. Monitor the advisory for updates and apply mitigations in the interim.
- Is CVE-2025-22022 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2025-22022 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2025-22022 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.