BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-38349High confidence

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

Linux · Linux

7.8HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 21 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:Medium, lowered one band.downgradedsince 3 Oct 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.16% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Linux Linux and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 21 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

25 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 21 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

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.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.41-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.16.3-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.16.3-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinuxAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-awsAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azureAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azure-fdeAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azure-nvidiaAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gcpAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeopAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-ibmAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-intelAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-lowlatencyAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidiaAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-lowlatencyAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-tegraAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oem-6.11Affected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oracleAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspiAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-riscvAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-xilinxAffected, 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 Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2025-38349 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 60 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2025-38349
65 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP6
  • kernel-default-extra as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP6
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP6
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-default-extra as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • cluster-md-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • dlm-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • gfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • ocfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
Summary
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).
Remediation
To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
Optional official sources

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

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

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-2025-21860

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

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).

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
7.8 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 21 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

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).

What

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).

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: 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).

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.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-21860Official EUVD mapping

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).

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-2253IBM Security Verify Access: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in IBM Security Verify Access ausnutzen, um erweiterte Berechtigungen zu erlangen, beliebigen Code auszuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren, sensible Informationen offenzulegen und andere, nicht näher bezeichnete Angriffe durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-2711Android Patchday Dezember 2025: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Google Android ausnutzen, um sich erweiterte Berechtigungen zu verschaffen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand auszulösen, vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen oder andere nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-1596Linux 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.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20250724Security Bulletin 24 Jul 2025 [701KB]

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 24 Jul 2025 [701KB], published on 24 July 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0326Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

d?id=CVE-2025-38300 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38321 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38321 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38329 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38329 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38330 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38330 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38331 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38331 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38333 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38333 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38340 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38340 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38353 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38353 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38359 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38359 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38360 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38360 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38368 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38369 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38369 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38373 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38373 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38408 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0316Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

d?id=CVE-2025-38300 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38321 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38321 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38329 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38329 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38330 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38330 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38331 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38331 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38333 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38333 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38340 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38340 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38353 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38353 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38359 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38359 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38360 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38360 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38368 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38369 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38369 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38373 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38373 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38408 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0290Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Red Hat

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux de Red Hat. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer une atteinte à l'intégrité des données, un contournement de la politique de sécurité et un problème de sécurité non spécifié par l'éditeur.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0246Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0227Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0218Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0194Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0193Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Red Hat

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux de Red Hat. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer un déni de service à distance, une atteinte à l'intégrité des données et un contournement de la politique de sécurité.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0169Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38368 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0107Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Red Hat

d?id=CVE-2025-21815 Référence CVE CVE-2025-23142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-23142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37761 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37761 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37789 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37789 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37819 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37819 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37849 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37849 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37891 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37891 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38051 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38051 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38731 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38731 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39898 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39898 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39971 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39971 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39993 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39993 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40154 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40154 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40248 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1135Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38095 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38118 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38118 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38148 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38148 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38165 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38165 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38227 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38227 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38240 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38240 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38335 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38437 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38437 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38438 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38438 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38439 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38439 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38440 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38440 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38441 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38441 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38443 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1073Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38339 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38339 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38341 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38341 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38350 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38350 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38353 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38353 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38355 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38355 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38356 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38356 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38359 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1075Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-37958 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37968 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37968 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38095 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38095 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38118 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38118 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38148 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38148 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38165 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38165 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38227 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38227 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38335 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38347 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38347 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38437 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38437 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38438 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38438 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38439 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38439 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38440 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38440 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38441 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38441 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38443 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1056Multiples vulnérabilités dans Google Android

ord?id=CVE-2025-27070 Référence CVE CVE-2025-27074 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-27074 Référence CVE CVE-2025-3012 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-3012 Référence CVE CVE-2025-31717 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-31717 Référence CVE CVE-2025-31718 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-31718 Référence CVE CVE-2025-32319 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-32319 Référence CVE CVE-2025-32328 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-32328 Référence CVE CVE-2025-32329 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-32329 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38236 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38236 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38500 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38500 Référence CVE CVE-2025-46711 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-46711 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47319 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47319 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47323 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47323 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47370 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47370 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47372 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1050Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-22095 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22097 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22097 Référence CVE CVE-2025-23136 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-23136 Référence CVE CVE-2025-23138 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-23138 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37937 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37937 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38227 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38227 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38240 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38240 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38335 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38437 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38437 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38438 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38438 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38439 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38439 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38440 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38440 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38441 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38441 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38443 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38443 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38444 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0759Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38336 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38336 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38337 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38350 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38350 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38365 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38369 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0745Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38336 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38336 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38337 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38350 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38350 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38353 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38353 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38355 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38355 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38356 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38356 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0723Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38336 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38336 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38337 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38338 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38338 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38343 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38343 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38350 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38350 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38353 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38353 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38355 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38355 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38356 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38356 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38361 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38361 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0698Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian

d?id=CVE-2025-38334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38335 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38335 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38336 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38336 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38337 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38337 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38342 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38342 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38344 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38344 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38345 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38345 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38346 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38349 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38349 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38350 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38350 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38351 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38352 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38352 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38354 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38354 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38362 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38362 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38363 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38365 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2025-020088Linux の Linux Kernel における解放済みメモリの使用に関する脆弱性

Linux の Linux Kernel には、解放済みメモリの使用に関する脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
NCSC-NL · Dutch · NCSC-2025-0379Kwetsbaarheden verholpen in Google Android en Samsung Mobile

Recent updates to SUSE Linux Enterprise kernels and Chrome addressed multiple security vulnerabilities, particularly in memory management, network protocols, and device handling, including use-after-free issues in the Linux kernel and Chrome's epoll system.

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.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Fixed
Linux: < 6.4, 5.15.222 ≤ 5.15.*, 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.99 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.39 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.15.7 ≤ 6.15.*, 6.16 ≤ *
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 18 Jul 2025 · Last source change 3 Oct 2026, 10:55 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-2025-21860
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

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

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    a1f93804449d13f97dabd4b996817de4bf1ed67a < b0821ec902d39062356cb644c16e17a705d1c9f5; 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 521e9ff0b67c66a17d6f9593dfccafaa984aae4c; 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 6dee745bd0aec9d399df674256e7b1ecdb615444; 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 605c18698ecfa99165f36b7f59d3ed503e169814; 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 8c2e52ebbe885c7eeaabd3b7ddcdc1246fc400d2; f2451def095c1743adcfcb0cb5dadc86034e162a; 6.1.175 < 6.1.178; 5.15.209 < 5.16 · Fixed: < 6.4; 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.99 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.39 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.15.7 ≤ 6.15.*; 6.16 ≤ *
    After
    Linux: f2451def095c1743adcfcb0cb5dadc86034e162a < 263f5de8302a6f2f136d392e5d3f8b1edf922857, a1f93804449d13f97dabd4b996817de4bf1ed67a < b0821ec902d39062356cb644c16e17a705d1c9f5, 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 521e9ff0b67c66a17d6f9593dfccafaa984aae4c, 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 6dee745bd0aec9d399df674256e7b1ecdb615444, 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 605c18698ecfa99165f36b7f59d3ed503e169814, 58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 8c2e52ebbe885c7eeaabd3b7ddcdc1246fc400d2, 5.15.209 < 5.15.222, 6.1.175 < 6.1.178, 6.4 · Fixed: Linux: < 6.4, 5.15.222 ≤ 5.15.*, 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.99 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.39 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.15.7 ≤ 6.15.*, 6.16 ≤ *
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-21860↗Vendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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-2025-38349 · cve.blacktree.nl