Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: schhtb: make htbdeactivate...
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sch_htb: make htb_deactivate() idempotent
Alan reported a NULL pointer dereference in htb_next_rb_node()
after we made htb_qlen_notify() idempotent.
It turns out in the following case it introduced some regression:
htb_dequeue_tree():
|-> fq_codel_dequeue()
|-> qdisc_tree_reduce_backlog()
|-> htb_qlen_notify()
|-> htb_deactivate()
|-> htb_next_rb_node()
|-> htb_deactivate()
For htb_next_rb_node(), after calling the 1st htb_deactivate(), the
clprio[prio]->ptr could be already set to NULL, which means
htb_next_rb_node() is vulnerable here.
For htb_deactivate(), although we checked qlen before calling it, in
case of qlen==0 after qdisc_tree_reduce_backlog(), we may call it again
which triggers the warning inside.
To fix the issues here, we need to:
- Make htb_deactivate() idempotent, that is, simply return if we
already call it before. - Make htb_next_rb_node() safe against ptr==NULL.
Many thanks to Alan for testing and for the reproducer.
Impact
The application dereferences a null pointer, causing a crash. Typical impact: denial of service via crash.
CVE-2025-37953 has a CVSS score of 5.5 (Medium). 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-2025-37953? CVE-2025-37953 is a medium-severity null pointer dereference vulnerability. No fixed version is listed yet. The application dereferences a null pointer, causing a crash.
- How severe is CVE-2025-37953? CVE-2025-37953 has a CVSS score of 5.5 (Medium). 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-2025-37953? No fixed version is listed for CVE-2025-37953 yet. Monitor the advisory for updates and apply mitigations in the interim.
- Is CVE-2025-37953 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2025-37953 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-2025-37953 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.