Back to the CVE list
CVE-2025-37814

tty: Require CAP_SYS_ADMIN for all usages of TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT

CVSS score

7.8

EPSS probability

%0.2

Risk score

0.0

Published

1 y ago

Official patch verified

Etkilenen ürün ve sürüm için yayımlanan güvenlik güncellemesini uygulayın.

Impact on My Inventory

Only the personal products you have added to your account are assessed; an organisation's inventory does not appear here.

Checking session…

Vulnerability description

DayBreach CVE AI Research

CVE-2025-37814 has vendor, distribution, patch and security-source records on file. We can compare them and prepare an explanation linked to the evidence.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tty: Require CAP_SYS_ADMIN for all usages of TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT This requirement was overeagerly loosened in commit 2f83e38a095f ("tty: Permit some TIOCL_SETSEL modes without CAP_SYS_ADMIN"), but as it turns out, (1) the logic I implemented there was inconsistent (apologies!), (2) TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT might actually be a small security risk after all, and (3) TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT is only meant to be used by the mouse daemon (GPM or Consolation), which runs as CAP_SYS_ADMIN already. In more detail: 1. The previous patch has inconsistent logic: In commit 2f83e38a095f ("tty: Permit some TIOCL_SETSEL modes without CAP_SYS_ADMIN"), we checked for sel_mode == TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT, but overlooked that the lower four bits of this "mode" parameter were actually used as an additional way to pass an argument. So the patch did actually still require CAP_SYS_ADMIN, if any of the mouse button bits are set, but did not require it if none of the mouse buttons bits are set. This logic is inconsistent and was not intentional. We should have the same policies for using TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT independent of the value of the "hidden" mouse button argument. I sent a separate documentation patch to the man page list with more details on TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250223091342.35523-2-gnoack3000@gmail.com/ 2. TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT is indeed a potential security risk which can let an attacker simulate "keyboard" input to command line applications on the same terminal, like TIOCSTI and some other TIOCLINUX "selection mode" IOCTLs. By enabling mouse reporting on a terminal and then injecting mouse reports through TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT, an attacker can simulate mouse movements on the same terminal, similar to the TIOCSTI keystroke injection attacks that were previously possible with TIOCSTI and other TIOCL_SETSEL selection modes. Many programs (including libreadline/bash) are then prone to misinterpret these mouse reports as normal keyboard input because they do not expect input in the X11 mouse protocol form. The attacker does not have complete control over the escape sequence, but they can at least control the values of two consecutive bytes in the binary mouse reporting escape sequence. I went into more detail on that in the discussion at https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250221.0a947528d8f3@gnoack.org/ It is not equally trivial to simulate arbitrary keystrokes as it was with TIOCSTI (commit 83efeeeb3d04 ("tty: Allow TIOCSTI to be disabled")), but the general mechanism is there, and together with the small number of existing legit use cases (see below), it would be better to revert back to requiring CAP_SYS_ADMIN for TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT, as it was already the case before commit 2f83e38a095f ("tty: Permit some TIOCL_SETSEL modes without CAP_SYS_ADMIN"). 3. TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT is only used by the mouse daemons (GPM or Consolation), and they are the only legit use case: To quote console_codes(4): The mouse tracking facility is intended to return xterm(1)-compatible mouse status reports. Because the console driver has no way to know the device or type of the mouse, these reports are returned in the console input stream only when the virtual terminal driver receives a mouse update ioctl. These ioctls must be generated by a mouse-aware user-mode application such as the gpm(8) daemon. Jared Finder has also confirmed in https://lore.kernel.org/all/491f3df9de6593df8e70dbe77614b026@finder.org/ that Emacs does not call TIOCL_SELMOUSEREPORT directly, and it would be difficult to find good reasons for doing that, given that it would interfere with the reports that GPM is sending. More information on the interaction between GPM, terminals and th ---truncated---

IMPACT: Affected Products and Software

Affected Products

The following products are affected by CVE-2025-37814 vulnerability. Where our threat engine knows the exact affected versions, they are listed below.

IDVENDORPRODUCTACTION
1linuxLinux View
2linuxLinux View
3linuxlinux kernel View
4linuxlinux kernel View
5linuxlinux kernel View
Total affected vendors: 1|Products: 5

RED HAT CSAF/VEX: Product Impact Check

Red Hat has not yet published a CSAF/VEX impact record for this CVE. This does not mean “not affected”.

SCORING: CVSS from Multiple Sources

CVSS Scores

The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardised framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and display CVSS scores from several sources for each CVE.

SCOREVERSIONSEVERITYVECTORSOURCE
7.8CVSS V31HIGHCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HNVD
7.8CVSS V3_1HIGHCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVE CNA
5.5CVSS V31MEDIUMCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HNVD

Patch and Remediation Guide

Solution & Remediation Advisory

Patch verified

3 doğrulanmış yama veya düzeltilmiş sürüm kanıtı bulundu.

nvd

NVD tarafından Patch olarak etiketlenmiş referans

Open source
nvd

NVD tarafından Patch olarak etiketlenmiş referans

Open source
nvd

NVD tarafından Patch olarak etiketlenmiş referans

Open source
Confirm the affected product and version against the source evidence above.
Restrict access to internet-facing services and apply network segmentation.
Apply the official update named in the evidence only to the matching product and version.
Monitor server logs and network endpoints for signs of anomalous execution.

Public exploit and active exploitation status

Verified exploit intelligence

No verified public PoC, exploit repository or Metasploit module has been found for this CVE yet.

Weakness Classification and Attack Patterns (CWE & CAPEC)

CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration

While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorises the common flaws or weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2025-37814 is associated with the following CWEs:

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2025-37814 weaknesses.

Attack Vector and Accessibility

ExposureYerel erişim
PermissionsLow
UserGerekmiyor

Official Sources and Advisories

CVSS Vector Radar Chart

7.8 / 10
Attack VectorLocalComplexityLowPrivilegesLowUser Interact.NoneConfidentialityLowIntegrityNoneAvailabilityHigh

Vulnerability Scoring Details

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Attack VectorLocal
Attack ComplexityLow
Privileges RequiredLow privileges
User InteractionNone required
Confidentiality (Gizlilik)Low
Integrity (Bütünlük)None
Availability (Erişilebilirlik)High

Yama doğrulandı

3 doğrulanmış yama veya düzeltilmiş sürüm kanıtı bulundu.

Follow the vendor

L
linux logo
linux

Similar Vulnerabilities

Get this vulnerability through the API

Affected products, version ranges, exploitation status and patch information in a single request, with a free key.

curl -H "x-api-key: $DAYBREACH_API_KEY" \
  "https://api.daybreach.dev/api/v1/intel/cves/CVE-2025-37814"