CVE-2025-71079
Last modified
CVE-2025-71079 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 5.5/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: nfc: fix deadlock between nfc_unregister_device and rfkill_fop_write A deadlock can occur between nfc_unregister_device() and rfkill_fop_write() due to lock ordering inversion between device_lock and rfkill_global_mutex. The problematic lock order is: Thread A (rfkill_fop_write): rfkill_fop_write() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) rfkill_set_block() nfc_rfkill_set_block() nfc_dev_down() device_lock(&dev->dev) <- waits for device_lock Thread B (nfc_unregister_device): nfc_unregister_device() device_lock(&dev->dev) rfkill_unregister() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) <- waits for rfkill_global_mutex This creates a classic ABBA deadlock scenario. Fix this by moving rfkill_unregister() and rfkill_destroy() outside the device_lock critical section. Store the rfkill pointer in a local variable before releasing the lock, then call rfkill_unregister() after releasing device_lock. This change is safe because rfkill_fop_write() holds rfkill_global_mutex while calling the rfkill callbacks, and rfkill_unregister() also acquires rfkill_global_mutex before cleanup. EPSS estimates a 0.09% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: nfc: fix deadlock between nfc_unregister_device and rfkill_fop_write A deadlock can occur between nfc_unregister_device() and rfkill_fop_write() due to lock ordering inversion between device_lock and rfkill_global_mutex. The problematic lock order is: Thread A (rfkill_fop_write): rfkill_fop_write() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) rfkill_set_block() nfc_rfkill_set_block() nfc_dev_down() device_lock(&dev->dev) <- waits for device_lock Thread B (nfc_unregister_device): nfc_unregister_device() device_lock(&dev->dev) rfkill_unregister() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) <- waits for rfkill_global_mutex This creates a classic ABBA deadlock scenario. Fix this by moving rfkill_unregister() and rfkill_destroy() outside the device_lock critical section. Store the rfkill pointer in a local variable before releasing the lock, then call rfkill_unregister() after releasing device_lock. This change is safe because rfkill_fop_write() holds rfkill_global_mutex while calling the rfkill callbacks, and rfkill_unregister() also acquires rfkill_global_mutex before cleanup. Therefore, rfkill_unregister() will wait for any ongoing callback to complete before proceeding, and device_del() is only called after rfkill_unregister() returns, preventing any use-after-free. The similar lock ordering in nfc_register_device() (device_lock -> rfkill_global_mutex via rfkill_register) is safe because during registration the device is not yet in rfkill_list, so no concurrent rfkill operations can occur on this device.
Metrics
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 4.4.293, < 4.5 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 4.9.291, < 4.10 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 4.14.256, < 4.15 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 4.19.218, < 4.20 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.4.162, < 5.5 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.10.82, < 5.10.248 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.15.5, < 5.15.198 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.16.1, < 6.1.160 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.2, < 6.6.120 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.7, < 6.12.64 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.13, < 6.18.4 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 5.16 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 6.19 | Rc1 |
References
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Analyzed
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2025-71079?
How severe is CVE-2025-71079?
How do I fix CVE-2025-71079?
Are you affected by CVE-2025-71079?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST