BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-40025High confidence

f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode

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 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 severityHighOperational priority:Medium, lowered one band.downgradedsince 5 Aug 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.14% 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 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.

24 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 · sourcelinuxAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.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.6.17.6-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.17.6-1Debian 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-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-2025-36442

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

High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. 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: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode As syzbot reported below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/file.c:1243! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5354 Comm: syz.0.0 Not tainted 6.17.0-rc1-syzkaller-00211-g90d970cade8e #0 PREEMPT(full) RIP: 0010:f2fs_truncate_hole+0x69e/0x6c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:1243 Call Trace: <TASK> f2fs_punch_hole+0x2db/0x330 fs/f2fs/file.c:1306 f2fs_fallocate+0x546/0x990 fs/f2fs/file.c:2018 vfs_fallocate+0x666/0x7e0 fs/open.c:342 ksys_fallocate fs/open.c:366 [inline] __do_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:371 [inline] __se_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:369 [inline] __x64_sys_fallocate+0xc0/0x110 fs/open.c:369 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f1e65f8ebe9 w/ a fuzzed image, f2fs may encounter panic due to it detects inconsistent truncation range in direct node in f2fs_truncate_hole(). The root cause is: a non-inode dnode may has the same footer.ino and footer.nid, so the dnode will be parsed as an inode, then ADDRS_PER_PAGE() may return wrong blkaddr count which may be 923 typically, by chance, dn.ofs_in_node is equal to 923, then count can be calculated to 0 in below statement, later it will trigger panic w/ f2fs_bug_on(, count == 0 || ...). count = min(end_offset - dn.ofs_in_node, pg_end - pg_start); This patch introduces a new node_type NODE_TYPE_NON_INODE, then allowing passing the new_type to sanity_check_node_footer in f2fs_get_node_folio() to detect corruption that a non-inode dnode has the same footer.ino and footer.nid. Scripts to reproduce: mkfs.f2fs -f /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs touch /mnt/f2fs/foo touch /mnt/f2fs/bar dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/f2fs/foo bs=1M count=8 umount /mnt/f2fs inject.f2fs --node --mb i_nid --nid 4 --idx 0 --val 5 /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs xfs_io /mnt/f2fs/foo -c "fpunch 6984k 4k"

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode As syzbot reported below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/file.c:1243! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5354 Comm: syz.0.0 Not tainted 6.17.0-rc1-syzkaller-00211-g90d970cade8e #0 PREEMPT(full) RIP: 0010:f2fs_truncate_hole+0x69e/0x6c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:1243 Call Trace: <TASK> f2fs_punch_hole+0x2db/0x330 fs/f2fs/file.c:1306 f2fs_fallocate+0x546/0x990 fs/f2fs/file.c:2018 vfs_fallocate+0x666/0x7e0 fs/open.c:342 ksys_fallocate fs/open.c:366 [inline] __do_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:371 [inline] __se_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:369 [inline] __x64_sys_fallocate+0xc0/0x110 fs/open.c:369 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f1e65f8ebe9 w/ a fuzzed image, f2fs may encounter panic due to it detects inconsistent truncation range in direct node in f2fs_truncate_hole(). The root cause is: a non-inode dnode may has the same footer.ino and footer.nid, so the dnode will be parsed as an inode, then ADDRS_PER_PAGE() may return wrong blkaddr count which may be 923 typically, by chance, dn.ofs_in_node is equal to 923, then count can be calculated to 0 in below statement, later it will trigger panic w/ f2fs_bug_on(, count == 0 || ...). count = min(end_offset - dn.ofs_in_node, pg_end - pg_start); This patch introduces a new node_type NODE_TYPE_NON_INODE, then allowing passing the new_type to sanity_check_node_footer in f2fs_get_node_folio() to detect corruption that a non-inode dnode has the same footer.ino and footer.nid. Scripts to reproduce: mkfs.f2fs -f /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs touch /mnt/f2fs/foo touch /mnt/f2fs/bar dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/f2fs/foo bs=1M count=8 umount /mnt/f2fs inject.f2fs --node --mb i_nid --nid 4 --idx 0 --val 5 /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs xfs_io /mnt/f2fs/foo -c "fpunch 6984k 4k"

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

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: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode As syzbot reported below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/file.c:1243! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5354 Comm: syz.0.0 Not tainted 6.17.0-rc1-syzkaller-00211-g90d970cade8e #0 PREEMPT(full) RIP: 0010:f2fs_truncate_hole+0x69e/0x6c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:1243 Call Trace: <TASK> f2fs_punch_hole+0x2db/0x330 fs/f2fs/file.c:1306 f2fs_fallocate+0x546/0x990 fs/f2fs/file.c:2018 vfs_fallocate+0x666/0x7e0 fs/open.c:342 ksys_fallocate fs/open.c:366 [inline] __do_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:371 [inline] __se_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:369 [inline] __x64_sys_fallocate+0xc0/0x110 fs/open.c:369 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f1e65f8ebe9 w/ a fuzzed image, f2fs may encounter panic due to it detects inconsistent truncation range in direct node in f2fs_truncate_hole(). The root cause is: a non-inode dnode may has the same footer.ino and footer.nid, so the dnode will be parsed as an inode, then ADDRS_PER_PAGE() may return wrong blkaddr count which may be 923 typically, by chance, dn.ofs_in_node is equal to 923, then count can be calculated to 0 in below statement, later it will trigger panic w/ f2fs_bug_on(, count == 0 || ...). count = min(end_offset - dn.ofs_in_node, pg_end - pg_start); This patch introduces a new node_type NODE_TYPE_NON_INODE, then allowing passing the new_type to sanity_check_node_footer in f2fs_get_node_folio() to detect corruption that a non-inode dnode has the same footer.ino and footer.nid. Scripts to reproduce: mkfs.f2fs -f /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs touch /mnt/f2fs/foo touch /mnt/f2fs/bar dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/f2fs/foo bs=1M count=8 umount /mnt/f2fs inject.f2fs --node --mb i_nid --nid 4 --idx 0 --val 5 /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs xfs_io /mnt/f2fs/foo -c "fpunch 6984k 4k"

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

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 → vulnerable operation → 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.
CWE not yet assigned
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.
A

Official authority intelligence

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

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-2430Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff oder andere, nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20251029Security Bulletin 29 Oct 2025

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 29 Oct 2025, published on 29 October 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1203Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-38717 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39677 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39677 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39789 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39789 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39859 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39859 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39862 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39862 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39896 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39896 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39933 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39933 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39958 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39958 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39990 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39990 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40040 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40040 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40054 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40054 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40064 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40064 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40074 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40074 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40075 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40075 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40158 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40168 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?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=CVE-2025-40032 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40036 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40036 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40039 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40039 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40040 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40040 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40054 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40054 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40057 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40057 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40064 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40064 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40071 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?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=CVE-2025-40032 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40036 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40036 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40039 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40039 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40040 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40040 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40054 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40054 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40057 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40057 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40064 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40064 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40071 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-1106Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-37958 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38227 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38227 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38616 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38616 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38666 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38666 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38678 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38678 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39946 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39946 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39964 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39964 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39993 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39993 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40018 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40018 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40026 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40026 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40027 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40027 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40028 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40028 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40108 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40108 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40109 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40109 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40232 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40232 Gestion détaillée du document le 12 décembre 2025 Version initiale Alertes Avis Bulletins d’actualités Mentions légales Conditions générale

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

d?id=CVE-2025-39864 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39865 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39865 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39866 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39866 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39891 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39891 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39894 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39894 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39902 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39902 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39920 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39920 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39964 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39964 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40018 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40018 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40026 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40026 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40027 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40027 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40028 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40028 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40108 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40108 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40109 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40109 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40157 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40157 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40300 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40300 Gestion détaillée du document le 05 décembre 2025 Version init

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0969Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

ord?id=CVE-2025-38617 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38618 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38618 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38727 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38727 Référence CVE CVE-2025-3933 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-3933 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40002 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40002 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40004 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40004 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40007 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40007 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40015 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40015 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40017 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40017 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40026 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40026 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40027 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40027 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40364 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40364 Référence CVE CVE-2025-4056 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-4056 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40778 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40778 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40780 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40780 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40909 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40909 Référence CVE CVE-2025-41232 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CV

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0967Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

d?id=CVE-2025-30703 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30704 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30704 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30705 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30705 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30715 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30715 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30721 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30721 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30722 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30722 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30749 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30749 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30754 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30754 Référence CVE CVE-2025-30761 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-30761 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40025 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40025 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40026 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40026 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40027 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40027 Référence CVE CVE-2025-41242 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-41242 Référence CVE CVE-2025-41244 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-41244 Référence CVE CVE-2025-41248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-41248 Référence CVE CVE-2025-41249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-41249 Référence CVE CVE-2025-4138 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-4138 Référence CVE CVE-2025-4207 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0941Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft

CVE-2025-40019 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40778 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40780 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-59530 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-62518 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-8677 du 25 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40020 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40021 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40024 du 26 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-11840 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40025 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40026 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40027 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40029 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40030 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40032 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40033 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40035 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40036 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40038 du 29 octobre 2025 Bulletin de sécurité Microsoft CVE-2025-40039

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: 98e4da8ca301e062d79ae168c67e56f3c3de3ce4 < 186098f34b8a5d65eb828f952c8cc56272c60ea0, 98e4da8ca301e062d79ae168c67e56f3c3de3ce4 < c18ecd99e0c707ef8f83cace861cbc3162f4fdf1, 3.8
Fixed
Linux: < 3.8, 6.17.2 ≤ 6.17.*, 6.18 ≤ *
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 28 Oct 2025 · Last source change 5 Aug 2026, 12:07 UTC · CWE not yet assigned

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-2025-36442
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD not scheduled

Missing structured fields: CWE classification. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

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-2025-40025 · cve.blacktree.nl