CVE-2025-38334

CVE-2025-38334 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel with a CVSS 3.x base score of 5.5. It is not currently listed as actively exploited by CISA, and its EPSS exploit-prediction score is low. The underlying weakness is classified as CWE-754.

Key facts

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/sgx: Prevent attempts to reclaim poisoned pages TL;DR: SGX page reclaim touches the page to copy its contents to secondary storage. SGX instructions do not gracefully handle machine checks. Despite this, the existing SGX code will try to reclaim pages that it _knows_ are poisoned. Avoid even trying to reclaim poisoned pages. The longer story: Pages used by an enclave only get epc_page->poison set in arch_memory_failure() but they currently stay on sgx_active_page_list until sgx_encl_release(), with the SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED flag untouched. epc_page->poison is not checked in the reclaimer logic meaning that, if other conditions are met, an attempt will be made to reclaim an EPC page that was poisoned. This is bad because 1. we don't want that page to end up added to another enclave and 2. it is likely to cause one core to shut down and the kernel to panic. Specifically, reclaiming uses microcode operations including "EWB" which accesses the EPC page contents to encrypt and write them out to non-SGX memory. Those operations cannot handle MCEs in their accesses other than by putting the executing core into a special shutdown state (affecting both threads with HT.) The kernel will subsequently panic on the remaining cores seeing the core didn't enter MCE handler(s) in time. Call sgx_unmark_page_reclaimable() to remove the affected EPC page from sgx_active_page_list on memory error to stop it being considered for reclaiming. Testing epc_page->poison in sgx_reclaim_pages() would also work but I assume it's better to add code in the less likely paths. The affected EPC page is not added to &node->sgx_poison_page_list until later in sgx_encl_release()->sgx_free_epc_page() when it is EREMOVEd. Membership on other lists doesn't change to avoid changing any of the lists' semantics except for sgx_active_page_list. There's a "TBD" comment in arch_memory_failure() about pre-emptive actions, the goal here is not to address everything that it may imply. This also doesn't completely close the time window when a memory error notification will be fatal (for a not previously poisoned EPC page) -- the MCE can happen after sgx_reclaim_pages() has selected its candidates or even *inside* a microcode operation (actually easy to trigger due to the amount of time spent in them.) The spinlock in sgx_unmark_page_reclaimable() is safe because memory_failure() runs in process context and no spinlocks are held, explicitly noted in a mm/memory-failure.c comment.

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2025-38334?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/sgx: Prevent attempts to reclaim poisoned pages TL;DR: SGX page reclaim touches the page to copy its contents to secondary storage. SGX instructions do not gracefully handle machine checks. Despite this, the existing SGX code will try to reclaim pages that it _knows_ are poisoned. Avoid even trying to reclaim poisoned pages. The longer story: Pages used by an enclave only get epc_page->poison set in arch_memory_failure() but they currently stay on sgx_active_page_list until sgx_encl_release(), with the SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED flag untouched. epc_page->poison is not checked in the reclaimer logic meaning that, if other conditions are met, an attempt will be made to reclaim an EPC page that was poisoned. This is bad because 1. we don't want that page to end up added to another enclave and 2. it is likely to cause one core to shut down and the kernel to panic. Specifically, reclaiming uses microcode operations including "EWB" which accesses the EPC page contents to encrypt and write them out to non-SGX memory. Those operations cannot handle MCEs in their accesses other than by putting the executing core into a special shutdown state (affecting both threads with HT.) The kernel will subsequently panic on the remaining cores seeing the core didn't enter MCE handler(s) in time. Call sgx_unmark_page_reclaimable() to remove the affected EPC page from sgx_active_page_list on memory error to stop it being considered for reclaiming. Testing epc_page->poison in sgx_reclaim_pages() would also work but I assume it's better to add code in the less likely paths. The affected EPC page is not added to &node->sgx_poison_page_list until later in sgx_encl_release()->sgx_free_epc_page() when it is EREMOVEd. Membership on other lists doesn't change to avoid changing any of the lists' semantics except for sgx_active_page_list. There's a "TBD" comment in arch_memory_failure() about pre-emptive actions, the goal here is not to address everything that it may imply. This also doesn't completely close the time window when a memory error notification will be fatal (for a not previously poisoned EPC page) -- the MCE can happen after sgx_reclaim_pages() has selected its candidates or even *inside* a microcode operation (actually easy to trigger due to the amount of time spent in them.) The spinlock in sgx_unmark_page_reclaimable() is safe because memory_failure() runs in process context and no spinlocks are held, explicitly noted in a mm/memory-failure.c comment.
How severe is CVE-2025-38334?
CVE-2025-38334 has a CVSS 3.x base score of 5.5, rated medium severity. It is exploitable over local access with low attack complexity, requires low privileges and no user interaction. Impact on confidentiality is none, integrity none, and availability high.
Is CVE-2025-38334 being actively exploited?
It is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog. Its EPSS exploit-prediction score is 0% (4th percentile), an estimate of the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
What products are affected by CVE-2025-38334?
CVE-2025-38334 primarily affects Linux Linux Kernel. In total, 2 product configurations (CPEs) are listed as vulnerable; see the affected-products list for the exact versions.
How do I fix CVE-2025-38334?
Review the linked vendor and NVD advisories for patched versions and mitigations, then upgrade or apply the recommended workaround.
Does CVE-2025-38334 have an EU (EUVD) identifier?
Yes. CVE-2025-38334 is tracked in the ENISA EU Vulnerability Database (EUVD) as EUVD-2025-20912.
When was CVE-2025-38334 published?
CVE-2025-38334 was published on 2025-07-10 and last updated on 2026-06-17.

References

Affected products (2)

More vulnerabilities in Linux Linux Kernel

All CVEs affecting Linux Linux Kernel →

Other CWE-754 (Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions) vulnerabilities

Browse all CWE-754 (Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions) vulnerabilities →