Most recent entries from all

ALSA-2026:1143 — Important: kernel security update

Affected: AlmaLinux:9: kernel, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-core, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-core, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-devel, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-devel-matched, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-modules, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-modules-core, AlmaLinux:9: kernel-64k-debug-modules-extra and 64 more

The kernel packages contain the Linux kernel, the core of any Linux operating system.

Security Fix(es):

* kernel: Linux kernel: Use-after-free in device mapper due to race condition in zone reporting (CVE-2025-38141) * kernel: Linux kernel use-after-free in eventpoll (CVE-2025-38349) * kernel: drm/xe: Fix vm_bind_ioctl double free bug (CVE-2025-38731) * kernel: Linux kernel: vsock vulnerability may lead to memory corruption (CVE-2025-40248) * kernel: mptcp: fix race condition in mptcp_schedule_work() (CVE-2025-40258) * kernel: Linux kernel: Out-of-bounds write in Bluetooth MGMT can lead to information disclosure and denial of service (CVE-2025-40294) * kernel: net: atlantic: fix fragment overflow handling in RX path (CVE-2025-68301) * kernel: Bluetooth: hci_sock: Prevent race in socket write iter and sock bind (CVE-2025-68305)

For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

bdu:2025-10757

BELL-CVE-2025-38349

Affected: Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts

certfr-2025-avi-0698 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux de Debian. Certaines d'entre elles permettent à un…

certfr-2025-avi-0698

EUVD-2026-347011

fkie_cve-2025-38349

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex

Jann Horn points out that epoll is decrementing the ep refcount and then doing a

mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);

afterwards. That's very wrong, because it can lead to a use-after-free.

That pattern is actually fine for the very last reference, because the code in question will delay the actual call to "ep_free(ep)" until after it has unlocked the mutex.

But it's wrong for the much subtler "next to last" case when somebody *else* may also be dropping their reference and free the ep while we're still using the mutex.

Note that this is true even if that other user is also using the same ep mutex: mutexes, unlike spinlocks, can not be used for object ownership, even if they guarantee mutual exclusion.

A mutex "unlock" operation is not atomic, and as one user is still accessing the mutex as part of unlocking it, another user can come in and get the now released mutex and free the data structure while the first user is still cleaning up.

See our mutex documentation in Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst, in particular the section [1] about semantics:

"mutex_unlock() may access the mutex structure even after it has internally released the lock already - so it's not safe for another context to acquire the mutex and assume that the mutex_unlock() context is not using the structure anymore"

So if we drop our ep ref before the mute…

GHSA-c7h3-7f54-949m

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex

Jann Horn points out that epoll is decrementing the ep refcount and then doing a

mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);

afterwards. That's very wrong, because it can lead to a use-after-free.

That pattern is actually fine for the very last reference, because the code in question will delay the actual call to "ep_free(ep)" until after it has unlocked the mutex.

But it's wrong for the much subtler "next to last" case when somebody *else* may also be dropping their reference and free the ep while we're still using the mutex.

Note that this is true even if that other user is also using the same ep mutex: mutexes, unlike spinlocks, can not be used for object ownership, even if they guarantee mutual exclusion.

See our mutex documentation in Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst, in particular the section [1] about semantics:

So if we drop our ep ref before the mute…

msrc_CVE-2025-38349 — eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex

msrc_CVE-2025-38349

OESA-2025-2767 — kernel security update

Affected: openEuler:24.03-LTS-SP2: kernel

The Linux Kernel, the operating system core itself. Security Fix(es):

A transient execution vulnerability in some AMD processors may allow an attacker to infer data in the L1D cache, potentially resulting in the leakage of sensitive information across privileged boundaries.(CVE-2024-36357)

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

fs/ntfs3: Prevent integer overflow in hdr_first_de()

The "de_off" and "used" variables come from the disk so they both need to check. The problem is that on 32bit systems if they're both greater than UINT_MAX - 16 then the check does work as intended because of an integer overflow.(CVE-2025-22080)

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

ext4: fix off-by-one error in do_split

Syzkaller detected a use-after-free issue in ext4_insert_dentry that was caused by out-of-bounds access due to incorrect splitting in do_split.

BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in ext4_insert_dentry+0x36a/0x6d0 fs/ext4/namei.c:2109 Write of size 251 at addr ffff888074572f14 by task syz-executor335/5847

CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5847 Comm: syz-executor335 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc6-syzkaller-00318-ga9cda7c0ffed #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/30/2024 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:120 print_address_description mm/kasan/report.c:377 [inline] print_report+0x169/0x550 mm/k…

openSUSE-SU-2025:20081-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

RHSA-2026:4111 — Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security update

kernel: Linux kernel: Use-after-free vulnerability in page_pool_recycle_in_ring can lead to arbitrary code execution kernel: Linux kernel: Denial of service due to use-after-free in scsi: lpfc kernel: Linux kernel use-after-free in eventpoll kernel: drm/xe: Make dma-fences compliant with the safe access rules kernel: smc: Fix use-after-free in __pnet_find_base_ndev() kernel: smc: Use __sk_dst_get() and dst_dev_rcu() in smc_clc_prfx_match()

SUSE-SU-2025:02853-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

UBUNTU-CVE-2025-38349

Affected: Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 158 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex Jann Horn points out that epoll is decrementing the ep refcount and then doing a mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx); afterwards. That's very wrong, because it can lead to a use-after-free. That pattern is actually fine for the very last reference, because the code in question will delay the actual call to "ep_free(ep)" until after it has unlocked the mutex. But it's wrong for the much subtler "next to last" case when somebody *else* may also be dropping their reference and free the ep while we're still using the mutex. Note that this is true even if that other user is also using the same ep mutex: mutexes, unlike spinlocks, can not be used for object ownership, even if they guarantee mutual exclusion. A mutex "unlock" operation is not atomic, and as one user is still accessing the mutex as part of unlocking it, another user can come in and get the now released mutex and free the data structure while the first user is still cleaning up. See our mutex documentation in Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst, in particular the section [1] about semantics: "mutex_unlock() may access the mutex structure even after it has internally released the lock already - so it's not safe for another context to acquire the mutex and assume that the mutex_unlock() context is not using the structure anymore" So if we drop our ep ref before the mutex unlock, b…

WID-SEC-W-2025-1596 — Linux Kernel: Schwachstelle ermöglicht Denial of Service und nicht spezifizierten Angriff

Ein lokaler Angreifer kann eine Schwachstelle im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service, und nicht näher spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu verursachen.