BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-39989High confidence

x86/mce: use is_copy_from_user() to determine copy-from-user context

Linux · Linux

5.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 22 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 severityMediumOperational priority:Low, lowered one band.downgradedsince 23 May 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.25% 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: No default targetRemediation target: Normal maintenance

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 22 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 22 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.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.25-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 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
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-2025-11814

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 actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 22 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: x86/mce: use is_copy_from_user() to determine copy-from-user context Patch series "mm/hwpoison: Fix regressions in memory failure handling", v4. ## 1. What am I trying to do: This patchset resolves two critical regressions related to memory failure handling that have appeared in the upstream kernel since version 5.17, as compared to 5.10 LTS. - copyin case: poison found in user page while kernel copying from user space - instr case: poison found while instruction fetching in user space ## 2. What is the expected outcome and why - For copyin case: Kernel can recover from poison found where kernel is doing get_user() or copy_from_user() if those places get an error return and the kernel return -EFAULT to the process instead of crashing. More specifily, MCE handler checks the fixup handler type to decide whether an in kernel #MC can be recovered. When EX_TYPE_UACCESS is found, the PC jumps to recovery code specified in _ASM_EXTABLE_FAULT() and return a -EFAULT to user space. - For instr case: If a poison found while instruction fetching in user space, full recovery is possible. User process takes #PF, Linux allocates a new page and fills by reading from storage. ## 3. What actually happens and why - For copyin case: kernel panic since v5.17 Commit 4c132d1d844a ("x86/futex: Remove .fixup usage") introduced a new extable fixup type, EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG, and later patches updated the extable fixup type for copy-from-user operations, changing it from EX_TYPE_UACCESS to EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG. It breaks previous EX_TYPE_UACCESS handling when posion found in get_user() or copy_from_user(). - For instr case: user process is killed by a SIGBUS signal due to #CMCI and #MCE race When an uncorrected memory error is consumed there is a race between the CMCI from the memory controller reporting an uncorrected error with a UCNA signature, and the core reporting and SRAR signature machine check when the data is about to be consumed. ### Background: why *UN*corrected errors tied to *C*MCI in Intel platform [1] Prior to Icelake memory controllers reported patrol scrub events that detected a previously unseen uncorrected error in memory by signaling a broadcast machine check with an SRAO (Software Recoverable Action Optional) signature in the machine check bank. This was overkill because it's not an urgent problem that no core is on the verge of consuming that bad data. It's also found that multi SRAO UCE may cause nested MCE interrupts and finally become an IERR. Hence, Intel downgrades the machine check bank signature of patrol scrub from SRAO to UCNA (Uncorrected, No Action required), and signal changed to #CMCI. Just to add to the confusion, Linux does take an action (in uc_decode_notifier()) to try to offline the page despite the UC*NA* signature name. ### Background: why #CMCI and #MCE race when poison is consuming in Intel platform [1] Having decided that CMCI/UCNA is the best action for patrol scrub errors, the memory controller uses it for reads too. But the memory controller is executing asynchronously from the core, and can't tell the difference between a "real" read and a speculative read. So it will do CMCI/UCNA if an error is found in any read. Thus: 1) Core is clever and thinks address A is needed soon, issues a speculative read. 2) Core finds it is going to use address A soon after sending the read request 3) The CMCI from the memory controller is in a race with MCE from the core that will soon try to retire the load from address A. Quite often (because speculation has got better) the CMCI from the memory controller is delivered before the core is committed to the instruction reading address A, so the interrupt is taken, and Linux offlines the page (marking it as poison). ## Why user process is killed for instr case Commit 046545a661af ("mm/hwpoison: fix error page recovered but reported "not ---truncated---

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/mce: use is_copy_from_user() to determine copy-from-user context Patch series "mm/hwpoison: Fix regressions in memory failure handling", v4. ## 1. What am I trying to do: This patchset resolves two critical regressions related to memory failure handling that have appeared in the upstream kernel since version 5.17, as compared to 5.10 LTS. - copyin case: poison found in user page while kernel copying from user space - instr case: poison found while instruction fetching in user space ## 2. What is the expected outcome and why - For copyin case: Kernel can recover from poison found where kernel is doing get_user() or copy_from_user() if those places get an error return and the kernel return -EFAULT to the process instead of crashing. More specifily, MCE handler checks the fixup handler type to decide whether an in kernel #MC can be recovered. When EX_TYPE_UACCESS is found, the PC jumps to recovery code specified in _ASM_EXTABLE_FAULT() and return a -EFAULT to user space. - For instr case: If a poison found while instruction fetching in user space, full recovery is possible. User process takes #PF, Linux allocates a new page and fills by reading from storage. ## 3. What actually happens and why - For copyin case: kernel panic since v5.17 Commit 4c132d1d844a ("x86/futex: Remove .fixup usage") introduced a new extable fixup type, EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG, and later patches updated the extable fixup type for copy-from-user operations, changing it from EX_TYPE_UACCESS to EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG. It breaks previous EX_TYPE_UACCESS handling when posion found in get_user() or copy_from_user(). - For instr case: user process is killed by a SIGBUS signal due to #CMCI and #MCE race When an uncorrected memory error is consumed there is a race between the CMCI from the memory controller reporting an uncorrected error with a UCNA signature, and the core reporting and SRAR signature machine check when the data is about to be consumed. ### Background: why *UN*corrected errors tied to *C*MCI in Intel platform [1] Prior to Icelake memory controllers reported patrol scrub events that detected a previously unseen uncorrected error in memory by signaling a broadcast machine check with an SRAO (Software Recoverable Action Optional) signature in the machine check bank. This was overkill because it's not an urgent problem that no core is on the verge of consuming that bad data. It's also found that multi SRAO UCE may cause nested MCE interrupts and finally become an IERR. Hence, Intel downgrades the machine check bank signature of patrol scrub from SRAO to UCNA (Uncorrected, No Action required), and signal changed to #CMCI. Just to add to the confusion, Linux does take an action (in uc_decode_notifier()) to try to offline the page despite the UC*NA* signature name. ### Background: why #CMCI and #MCE race when poison is consuming in Intel platform [1] Having decided that CMCI/UCNA is the best action for patrol scrub errors, the memory controller uses it for reads too. But the memory controller is executing asynchronously from the core, and can't tell the difference between a "real" read and a speculative read. So it will do CMCI/UCNA if an error is found in any read. Thus: 1) Core is clever and thinks address A is needed soon, issues a speculative read. 2) Core finds it is going to use address A soon after sending the read request 3) The CMCI from the memory controller is in a race with MCE from the core that will soon try to retire the load from address A. Quite often (because speculation has got better) the CMCI from the memory controller is delivered before the core is committed to the instruction reading address A, so the interrupt is taken, and Linux offlines the page (marking it as poison). ## Why user process is killed for instr case Commit 046545a661af ("mm/hwpoison: fix error page recovered but reported "not ---truncated---

Why

The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/mce: use is_copy_from_user() to determine copy-from-user context Patch series "mm/hwpoison: Fix regressions in memory failure handling", v4. ## 1. What am I trying to do: This patchset resolves two critical regressions related to memory failure handling that have appeared in the upstream kernel since version 5.17, as compared to 5.10 LTS. - copyin case: poison found in user page while kernel copying from user space - instr case: poison found while instruction fetching in user space ## 2. What is the expected outcome and why - For copyin case: Kernel can recover from poison found where kernel is doing get_user() or copy_from_user() if those places get an error return and the kernel return -EFAULT to the process instead of crashing. More specifily, MCE handler checks the fixup handler type to decide whether an in kernel #MC can be recovered. When EX_TYPE_UACCESS is found, the PC jumps to recovery code specified in _ASM_EXTABLE_FAULT() and return a -EFAULT to user space. - For instr case: If a poison found while instruction fetching in user space, full recovery is possible. User process takes #PF, Linux allocates a new page and fills by reading from storage. ## 3. What actually happens and why - For copyin case: kernel panic since v5.17 Commit 4c132d1d844a ("x86/futex: Remove .fixup usage") introduced a new extable fixup type, EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG, and later patches updated the extable fixup type for copy-from-user operations, changing it from EX_TYPE_UACCESS to EX_TYPE_EFAULT_REG. It breaks previous EX_TYPE_UACCESS handling when posion found in get_user() or copy_from_user(). - For instr case: user process is killed by a SIGBUS signal due to #CMCI and #MCE race When an uncorrected memory error is consumed there is a race between the CMCI from the memory controller reporting an uncorrected error with a UCNA signature, and the core reporting and SRAR signature machine check when the data is about to be consumed. ### Background: why *UN*corrected errors tied to *C*MCI in Intel platform [1] Prior to Icelake memory controllers reported patrol scrub events that detected a previously unseen uncorrected error in memory by signaling a broadcast machine check with an SRAO (Software Recoverable Action Optional) signature in the machine check bank. This was overkill because it's not an urgent problem that no core is on the verge of consuming that bad data. It's also found that multi SRAO UCE may cause nested MCE interrupts and finally become an IERR. Hence, Intel downgrades the machine check bank signature of patrol scrub from SRAO to UCNA (Uncorrected, No Action required), and signal changed to #CMCI. Just to add to the confusion, Linux does take an action (in uc_decode_notifier()) to try to offline the page despite the UC*NA* signature name. ### Background: why #CMCI and #MCE race when poison is consuming in Intel platform [1] Having decided that CMCI/UCNA is the best action for patrol scrub errors, the memory controller uses it for reads too. But the memory controller is executing asynchronously from the core, and can't tell the difference between a "real" read and a speculative read. So it will do CMCI/UCNA if an error is found in any read. Thus: 1) Core is clever and thinks address A is needed soon, issues a speculative read. 2) Core finds it is going to use address A soon after sending the read request 3) The CMCI from the memory controller is in a race with MCE from the core that will soon try to retire the load from address A. Quite often (because speculation has got better) the CMCI from the memory controller is delivered before the core is committed to the instruction reading address A, so the interrupt is taken, and Linux offlines the page (marking it as poison). ## Why user process is killed for instr case Commit 046545a661af ("mm/hwpoison: fix error page recovered but reported "not ---truncated---

Why

The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.

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 → Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime → disrupt the affected service
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-401 ↗

CWE-401: Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime. The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.

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:N/I:N/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.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.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.
Denial of serviceCWE-401
A

Official authority intelligence

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

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-0861Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Zustand oder nicht näher spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu verursachen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20250430Security Bulletin 30 Apr 2020

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 30 Apr 2020, published on 30 April 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20250423Security Bulletin 23 Apr 2025

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 23 Apr 2025, published on 23 April 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-2025-39940 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39942 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39942 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39947 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39947 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39952 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39952 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39957 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39957 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39958 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39958 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39961 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39961 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39977 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39977 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39978 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39978 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39990 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39990 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39992 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39992 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40003 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40003 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40005 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40005 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40012 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40012 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40016 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40016 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40032 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39940 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39942 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39942 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39947 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39947 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39952 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39952 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39957 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39957 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39958 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39958 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39961 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39961 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39977 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39977 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39978 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39978 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39990 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39990 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39992 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39992 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40003 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40003 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40005 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40005 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40012 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40012 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40016 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40016 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40032 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39795 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39795 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39797 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39800 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39801 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39801 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39889 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39889 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39890 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39890 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39946 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39946 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40019 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40019 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40214 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40215 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40215 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40297 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40297 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68750 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68750 Gestion détaillée du document le 06 mars 2026 Version initiale Alertes Avis Bulletins d’actualités Mentions légales Conditions générales À propos Contact cyber.gouv.fr service-public.fr legifrance.gouv.fr info.gouv.f

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39794 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39795 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39795 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39797 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39797 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39798 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39798 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39800 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39800 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39801 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39801 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39889 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39889 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39890 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39890 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39946 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39946 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40001 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40001 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40002 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40002 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40003 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40003 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40004 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40004 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40019 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40019 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40029 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40029 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40030 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40030 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40031 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39970 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39971 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39971 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39972 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39972 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39973 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39973 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39980 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39980 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39985 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39985 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39986 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39986 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39987 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39987 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39988 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39988 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39994 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39994 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39995 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39995 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39996 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39996 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39998 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39998 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40001 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40001 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40006 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40006 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40011 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40011 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40019 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-2025-39970 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39971 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39971 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39972 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39972 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39973 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39973 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39980 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39980 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39985 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39985 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39986 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39986 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39987 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39987 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39988 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39988 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39994 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39994 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39995 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39995 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39996 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39996 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39998 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39998 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40001 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40001 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40002 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40002 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40003 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40003 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40004 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39970 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39971 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39971 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39972 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39972 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39973 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39973 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39980 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39980 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39985 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39985 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39986 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39986 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39987 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39987 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39988 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39988 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39993 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39993 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39994 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39994 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39995 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39995 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39996 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39996 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39998 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39998 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40001 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40001 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40002 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40002 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40003 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0589Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38479 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38575 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38575 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38637 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38637 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39688 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39688 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39728 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39728 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39735 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39735 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39755 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39755 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39778 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39778 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39930 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39930 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40014 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40014 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40114 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40114 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40325 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40325 Gestion détaillée du document le 11 juillet 2025 Version initiale Alertes Avis Bulletins d’actualités Mentions légales Conditions générales À propos Contact cyber.gouv.fr service-public.fr legifrance.gouv.fr info.gouv.fr france.fr info.gouv.fr/risques Premier Ministre / Secrétariat Général de la Défense et de la Sécurité Nationale / Agence nationale de la sécurité des

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0559Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38479 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38575 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38575 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38637 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38637 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39688 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39688 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39728 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39728 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39735 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39735 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39755 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39755 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39778 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39778 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39930 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39930 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39989 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39989 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40014 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40014 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40114 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40114 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40325 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40325 Gestion détaillée du document le 04 juillet 2025 Version initiale Alertes Avis Bulletins d’actualités Mentions légales Conditions générales À propos Contact cyber.gouv.fr service-public.fr legifrance.gouv.fr info.gouv.fr france.fr info.gouv.fr/risques Premier Ministre / Secrétariat Général de la Défense et de la Sécurité Nationale / Agence nationale de la sécurité des

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2025-018835Linux の Linux Kernel における有効期限後のメモリの解放の欠如に関する脆弱性

Linux の Linux Kernel には、有効期限後のメモリの解放の欠如に関する脆弱性が存在します。

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
Linux: 4c132d1d844a53fc4e4b5c34e36ef10d6124b783 < 5724654a084f701dc64b08d34a0e800f22f0e6e4, 4c132d1d844a53fc4e4b5c34e36ef10d6124b783 < 3e3d8169c0950a0b3cd5105f6403a78350dcac80, 4c132d1d844a53fc4e4b5c34e36ef10d6124b783 < 449413da90a337f343cc5a73070cbd68e92e8a54, 4c132d1d844a53fc4e4b5c34e36ef10d6124b783 < 0b8388e97ba6a8c033f9a8b5565af41af07f9345, 4c132d1d844a53fc4e4b5c34e36ef10d6124b783 < 1a15bb8303b6b104e78028b6c68f76a0d4562134, 88eded8104d2ca0429703755dd250f8cbecc1447, 5.15.58 < 5.16, 5.17
Fixed
Linux: < 5.17, 6.6.89 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.23 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.13.11 ≤ 6.13.*, 6.14.2 ≤ 6.14.*, 6.15 ≤ *
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 Apr 2025 · Last source change 23 May 2026, 16:01 UTC · CWE-401 · Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
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-2025-11814
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceNIST NVD
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-2025-39989 · cve.blacktree.nl