BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2022-49700High confidence

mm/slub: add missing TID updates on slab deactivation

Linux · Linux

7.8HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
Distribution package intelligence

Ubuntu vendor package status

Canonical’s release and source-package findings are shown separately from local repository availability.

1 package state
Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Ubuntu releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspi-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical record ↗Source updated 8 Sept 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2022-54535

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/slub: add missing TID updates on slab deactivation The fastpath in slab_alloc_node() assumes that c->slab is stable as long as the TID stays the same. However, two places in __slab_alloc() currently don't update the TID when deactivating the CPU slab. If multiple operations race the right way, this could lead to an object getting lost; or, in an even more unlikely situation, it could even lead to an object being freed onto the wrong slab's freelist, messing up the `inuse` counter and eventually causing a page to be freed to the page allocator while it still contains slab objects. (I haven't actually tested these cases though, this is just based on looking at the code. Writing testcases for this stuff seems like it'd be a pain...) The race leading to state inconsistency is (all operations on the same CPU and kmem_cache): - task A: begin do_slab_free(): - read TID - read pcpu freelist (==NULL) - check `slab == c->slab` (true) - [PREEMPT A->B] - task B: begin slab_alloc_node(): - fastpath fails (`c->freelist` is NULL) - enter __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - take local_lock_irqsave() - read c->freelist as NULL - get_freelist() returns NULL - write `c->slab = NULL` - drop local_unlock_irqrestore() - goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is NULL - get_partial() returns NULL - slub_put_cpu_ptr() (enables preemption) - [PREEMPT B->A] - task A: finish do_slab_free(): - this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() succeeds() - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab==NULL, c->freelist!=NULL] From there, the object on c->freelist will get lost if task B is allowed to continue from here: It will proceed to the retry_load_slab label, set c->slab, then jump to load_freelist, which clobbers c->freelist. But if we instead continue as follows, we get worse corruption: - task A: run __slab_free() on object from other struct slab: - CPU_PARTIAL_FREE case (slab was on no list, is now on pcpu partial) - task A: run slab_alloc_node() with NUMA node constraint: - fastpath fails (c->slab is NULL) - call __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - c->slab is NULL: goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is non-NULL - set c->slab to slub_percpu_partial(c) - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab points to slab-1, c->freelist has objects from slab-2] - goto redo - node_match() fails - goto deactivate_slab - existing c->freelist is passed into deactivate_slab() - inuse count of slab-1 is decremented to account for object from slab-2 At this point, the inuse count of slab-1 is 1 lower than it should be. This means that if we free all allocated objects in slab-1 except for one, SLUB will think that slab-1 is completely unused, and may free its page, leading to use-after-free.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/slub: add missing TID updates on slab deactivation The fastpath in slab_alloc_node() assumes that c->slab is stable as long as the TID stays the same. However, two places in __slab_alloc() currently don't update the TID when deactivating the CPU slab. If multiple operations race the right way, this could lead to an object getting lost; or, in an even more unlikely situation, it could even lead to an object being freed onto the wrong slab's freelist, messing up the `inuse` counter and eventually causing a page to be freed to the page allocator while it still contains slab objects. (I haven't actually tested these cases though, this is just based on looking at the code. Writing testcases for this stuff seems like it'd be a pain...) The race leading to state inconsistency is (all operations on the same CPU and kmem_cache): - task A: begin do_slab_free(): - read TID - read pcpu freelist (==NULL) - check `slab == c->slab` (true) - [PREEMPT A->B] - task B: begin slab_alloc_node(): - fastpath fails (`c->freelist` is NULL) - enter __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - take local_lock_irqsave() - read c->freelist as NULL - get_freelist() returns NULL - write `c->slab = NULL` - drop local_unlock_irqrestore() - goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is NULL - get_partial() returns NULL - slub_put_cpu_ptr() (enables preemption) - [PREEMPT B->A] - task A: finish do_slab_free(): - this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() succeeds() - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab==NULL, c->freelist!=NULL] From there, the object on c->freelist will get lost if task B is allowed to continue from here: It will proceed to the retry_load_slab label, set c->slab, then jump to load_freelist, which clobbers c->freelist. But if we instead continue as follows, we get worse corruption: - task A: run __slab_free() on object from other struct slab: - CPU_PARTIAL_FREE case (slab was on no list, is now on pcpu partial) - task A: run slab_alloc_node() with NUMA node constraint: - fastpath fails (c->slab is NULL) - call __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - c->slab is NULL: goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is non-NULL - set c->slab to slub_percpu_partial(c) - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab points to slab-1, c->freelist has objects from slab-2] - goto redo - node_match() fails - goto deactivate_slab - existing c->freelist is passed into deactivate_slab() - inuse count of slab-1 is decremented to account for object from slab-2 At this point, the inuse count of slab-1 is 1 lower than it should be. This means that if we free all allocated objects in slab-1 except for one, SLUB will think that slab-1 is completely unused, and may free its page, leading to use-after-free.

Why

The program can continue using memory after it has been released, producing unsafe and attacker-influenceable behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/slub: add missing TID updates on slab deactivation The fastpath in slab_alloc_node() assumes that c->slab is stable as long as the TID stays the same. However, two places in __slab_alloc() currently don't update the TID when deactivating the CPU slab. If multiple operations race the right way, this could lead to an object getting lost; or, in an even more unlikely situation, it could even lead to an object being freed onto the wrong slab's freelist, messing up the `inuse` counter and eventually causing a page to be freed to the page allocator while it still contains slab objects. (I haven't actually tested these cases though, this is just based on looking at the code. Writing testcases for this stuff seems like it'd be a pain...) The race leading to state inconsistency is (all operations on the same CPU and kmem_cache): - task A: begin do_slab_free(): - read TID - read pcpu freelist (==NULL) - check `slab == c->slab` (true) - [PREEMPT A->B] - task B: begin slab_alloc_node(): - fastpath fails (`c->freelist` is NULL) - enter __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - take local_lock_irqsave() - read c->freelist as NULL - get_freelist() returns NULL - write `c->slab = NULL` - drop local_unlock_irqrestore() - goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is NULL - get_partial() returns NULL - slub_put_cpu_ptr() (enables preemption) - [PREEMPT B->A] - task A: finish do_slab_free(): - this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() succeeds() - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab==NULL, c->freelist!=NULL] From there, the object on c->freelist will get lost if task B is allowed to continue from here: It will proceed to the retry_load_slab label, set c->slab, then jump to load_freelist, which clobbers c->freelist. But if we instead continue as follows, we get worse corruption: - task A: run __slab_free() on object from other struct slab: - CPU_PARTIAL_FREE case (slab was on no list, is now on pcpu partial) - task A: run slab_alloc_node() with NUMA node constraint: - fastpath fails (c->slab is NULL) - call __slab_alloc() - slub_get_cpu_ptr() (disables preemption) - enter ___slab_alloc() - c->slab is NULL: goto new_slab - slub_percpu_partial() is non-NULL - set c->slab to slub_percpu_partial(c) - [CORRUPT STATE: c->slab points to slab-1, c->freelist has objects from slab-2] - goto redo - node_match() fails - goto deactivate_slab - existing c->freelist is passed into deactivate_slab() - inuse count of slab-1 is decremented to account for object from slab-2 At this point, the inuse count of slab-1 is 1 lower than it should be. This means that if we free all allocated objects in slab-1 except for one, SLUB will think that slab-1 is completely unused, and may free its page, leading to use-after-free.

Why

The program can continue using memory after it has been released, producing unsafe and attacker-influenceable behaviour.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
local access → Use After Free → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-416

CWE-416: Use After Free. The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory belongs to the code that operates on the new pointer.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
CWE-416
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0336Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2022-49685 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49686 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49686 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49687 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49687 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49688 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49688 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49693 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49693 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49694 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49694 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49695 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49695 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49697 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49697 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49699 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49699 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49700 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49700 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49701 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49701 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49703 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49703 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49704 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49704 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49705 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49705 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49707 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49707 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49708 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49708 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49710 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49710 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49711 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0307Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2022-49685 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49686 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49686 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49687 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49687 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49688 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49688 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49693 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49693 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49694 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49694 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49695 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49695 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49697 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49697 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49699 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49699 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49700 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49700 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49701 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49701 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49703 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49703 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49704 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49704 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49705 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49705 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49707 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49707 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49708 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49708 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49710 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49710 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49711 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0252Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2022-49679 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49680 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49680 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49683 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49683 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49685 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49685 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49687 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49687 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49688 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49688 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49693 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49693 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49695 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49695 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49699 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49699 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49700 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49700 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49701 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49701 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49703 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49703 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49704 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49704 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49705 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49705 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49707 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49707 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49708 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49708 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49710 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49710 Référence CVE CVE-2022-49711 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < 308c6d0e1f200fd26c71270c6e6bfcf0fc6ff082; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < d6a597450e686d4c6388bd3cdcb17224b4dae7f0; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < e2b2f0e2e34d71ae6c2a1114fd3c525930e84bc7; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < e7e3e90d671078455a3a08189f89d85b3da2de9e; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < 6c32496964da0dc230cea763a0e934b2e02dabd5; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < 0515cc9b6b24877f59b222ade704bfaa42caa2a6; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < 197e257da473c725dfe47759c3ee02f2398d8ea5; 03e404af26dc2ea0d278d7a342de0aab394793ce < eeaa345e128515135ccb864c04482180c08e3259
Fixed
< 3.1; 4.9.323 ≤ 4.9.*; 4.14.288 ≤ 4.14.*; 4.19.252 ≤ 4.19.*; 5.4.205 ≤ 5.4.*; 5.10.130 ≤ 5.10.*; 5.15.54 ≤ 5.15.*; 5.18.8 ≤ 5.18.*
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 26 Feb 2025 · Last source change 5 Aug 2026, 08:56 UTC · CWE-416 · Use After Free

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-54535
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2022-49700 · cve.blacktree.nl