CVE-2025-38349
Last modified
CVE-2025-38349 is a high-severity vulnerability rated 7.8/10 on the CVSS scale. 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, but we weren't the last one, we may then unlock the mutex, another user comes in, drops _their_ reference and releases the 'ep' as it now has no users - all while the mutex_unlock() is still accessing it. Fix this by simply moving the ep refcount dropping to outside the mutex: the refcount itself is atomic, and doesn't need mutex protection (that's the whole _point_ of refcounts: unlike mutexes, they are inherently about object lifetimes).. EPSS estimates a 0.15% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
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, but we weren't the last one, we may then unlock the mutex, another user comes in, drops _their_ reference and releases the 'ep' as it now has no users - all while the mutex_unlock() is still accessing it. Fix this by simply moving the ep refcount dropping to outside the mutex: the refcount itself is atomic, and doesn't need mutex protection (that's the whole _point_ of refcounts: unlike mutexes, they are inherently about object lifetimes).
Metrics
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.4, < 6.6.99 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.7, < 6.12.39 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.13, < 6.15.7 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 6.16 | Rc1 |
References
- https://project-zero.issues.chromium.org/issues/430541637Issue Tracking, Patch
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Modified
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2025-38349?
How severe is CVE-2025-38349?
How do I fix CVE-2025-38349?
How Strix Helps
- How Strix found a critical auth bypass in etcdStrix autonomously discovered a critical authentication bypass in etcd, later designated CVE-2026-33413.
- Autonomous PentestingAI agents that find and validate exploitable vulnerabilities like this one across your applications.
- PR ReviewsPentest every pull request so vulnerable code is caught before it ships to production.
- AI Penetration TestingHow AI-driven penetration testing continuously covers your attack surface.
Related CVEs from 2025
- CVE-2025-38343In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38344In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38345In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38346In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…7.8
- CVE-2025-38347In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38348In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…7.8
- CVE-2025-3835Zohocorp ManageEngine Exchange Reporter Plus versions 5721 a…9.6
- CVE-2025-38350In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…7.8
- CVE-2025-38351In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38352In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…7.8
- CVE-2025-38353In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
- CVE-2025-38354In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been re…5.5
Are you affected by CVE-2025-38349?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
