BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-40214High confidence

af_unix: Initialise scc_index in unix_add_edge().

Linux · Linux

Official source article: Siemens SSA-253495 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

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 14 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 0.15% 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 14 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.

17 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 13 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.6.12.63-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.1.159-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.17.9-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.17.9-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-aws-6.14Affected, 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-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-azure-fde-6.14Affected, 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-nvidia-6.14Affected, 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-gcp-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-hwe-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-lowlatency-hwe-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-nvidia-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-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-oracle-6.14Affected, 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
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
SSA-253495 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 1 · interimSiemens ProductCERTSSA-253495: Multiple Vulnerabilities in SINEC OS before V4.0
1 known affected

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

  • RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (6GK6242-6PA00)
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: af_unix: Initialise scc_index in unix_add_edge(). Quang Le reported that the AF_UNIX GC could garbage-collect a receive queue of an alive in-flight socket, with a nice repro. The repro consists of three stages. 1) 1-a. Create a single cyclic reference with many sockets 1-b. close() all sockets 1-c. Trigger GC 2) 2-a. Pass sk-A to an embryo sk-B 2-b. Pass sk-X to sk-X 2-c. Trigger GC 3) 3-a. accept() the embryo sk-B 3-b. Pass sk-B to sk-C 3-c. close() the in-flight sk-A 3-d. Trigger GC As of 2-c, sk-A and sk-X are linked to unix_unvisited_vertices, and unix_walk_scc() groups them into two different SCCs: unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->scc_index = 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) unix_sk(sk-X)->vertex->scc_index = 3 Once GC completes, unix_graph_grouped is set to true. Also, unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is set to true due to sk-X's cyclic self-reference, which makes close() trigger GC. At 3-b, unix_add_edge() allocates unix_sk(sk-B)->vertex and links it to unix_unvisited_vertices. unix_update_graph() is called at 3-a. and 3-b., but neither unix_graph_grouped nor unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is changed because both sk-B's listener and sk-C are not in-flight. 3-c decrements sk-A's file refcnt to 1. Since unix_graph_grouped is true at 3-d, unix_walk_scc_fast() is finally called and iterates 3 sockets sk-A, sk-B, and sk-X: sk-A -> sk-B (-> sk-C) sk-X -> sk-X This is totally fine. All of them are not yet close()d and should be grouped into different SCCs. However, unix_vertex_dead() misjudges that sk-A and sk-B are in the same SCC and sk-A is dead. unix_sk(sk-A)->scc_index == unix_sk(sk-B)->scc_index vertex->out_degree ^-- 1 in-flight count for sk-B -> sk-A is dead !? The problem is that unix_add_edge() does not initialise scc_index. Stage 1) is used for heap spraying, making a newly allocated vertex have vertex->scc_index == 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) set by unix_walk_scc() at 1-c. Let's track the max SCC index from the previous unix_walk_scc() call and assign the max + 1 to a new vertex's scc_index. This way, we can continue to avoid Tarjan's algorithm while preventing misjudgments.
Remediation
Update to V4.0 or later version
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-2025-201158

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 14 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: af_unix: Initialise scc_index in unix_add_edge(). Quang Le reported that the AF_UNIX GC could garbage-collect a receive queue of an alive in-flight socket, with a nice repro. The repro consists of three stages. 1) 1-a. Create a single cyclic reference with many sockets 1-b. close() all sockets 1-c. Trigger GC 2) 2-a. Pass sk-A to an embryo sk-B 2-b. Pass sk-X to sk-X 2-c. Trigger GC 3) 3-a. accept() the embryo sk-B 3-b. Pass sk-B to sk-C 3-c. close() the in-flight sk-A 3-d. Trigger GC As of 2-c, sk-A and sk-X are linked to unix_unvisited_vertices, and unix_walk_scc() groups them into two different SCCs: unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->scc_index = 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) unix_sk(sk-X)->vertex->scc_index = 3 Once GC completes, unix_graph_grouped is set to true. Also, unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is set to true due to sk-X's cyclic self-reference, which makes close() trigger GC. At 3-b, unix_add_edge() allocates unix_sk(sk-B)->vertex and links it to unix_unvisited_vertices. unix_update_graph() is called at 3-a. and 3-b., but neither unix_graph_grouped nor unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is changed because both sk-B's listener and sk-C are not in-flight. 3-c decrements sk-A's file refcnt to 1. Since unix_graph_grouped is true at 3-d, unix_walk_scc_fast() is finally called and iterates 3 sockets sk-A, sk-B, and sk-X: sk-A -> sk-B (-> sk-C) sk-X -> sk-X This is totally fine. All of them are not yet close()d and should be grouped into different SCCs. However, unix_vertex_dead() misjudges that sk-A and sk-B are in the same SCC and sk-A is dead. unix_sk(sk-A)->scc_index == unix_sk(sk-B)->scc_index <-- Wrong! && sk-A's file refcnt == unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->out_degree ^-- 1 in-flight count for sk-B -> sk-A is dead !? The problem is that unix_add_edge() does not initialise scc_index. Stage 1) is used for heap spraying, making a newly allocated vertex have vertex->scc_index == 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) set by unix_walk_scc() at 1-c. Let's track the max SCC index from the previous unix_walk_scc() call and assign the max + 1 to a new vertex's scc_index. This way, we can continue to avoid Tarjan's algorithm while preventing misjudgments.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: af_unix: Initialise scc_index in unix_add_edge(). Quang Le reported that the AF_UNIX GC could garbage-collect a receive queue of an alive in-flight socket, with a nice repro. The repro consists of three stages. 1) 1-a. Create a single cyclic reference with many sockets 1-b. close() all sockets 1-c. Trigger GC 2) 2-a. Pass sk-A to an embryo sk-B 2-b. Pass sk-X to sk-X 2-c. Trigger GC 3) 3-a. accept() the embryo sk-B 3-b. Pass sk-B to sk-C 3-c. close() the in-flight sk-A 3-d. Trigger GC As of 2-c, sk-A and sk-X are linked to unix_unvisited_vertices, and unix_walk_scc() groups them into two different SCCs: unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->scc_index = 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) unix_sk(sk-X)->vertex->scc_index = 3 Once GC completes, unix_graph_grouped is set to true. Also, unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is set to true due to sk-X's cyclic self-reference, which makes close() trigger GC. At 3-b, unix_add_edge() allocates unix_sk(sk-B)->vertex and links it to unix_unvisited_vertices. unix_update_graph() is called at 3-a. and 3-b., but neither unix_graph_grouped nor unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is changed because both sk-B's listener and sk-C are not in-flight. 3-c decrements sk-A's file refcnt to 1. Since unix_graph_grouped is true at 3-d, unix_walk_scc_fast() is finally called and iterates 3 sockets sk-A, sk-B, and sk-X: sk-A -> sk-B (-> sk-C) sk-X -> sk-X This is totally fine. All of them are not yet close()d and should be grouped into different SCCs. However, unix_vertex_dead() misjudges that sk-A and sk-B are in the same SCC and sk-A is dead. unix_sk(sk-A)->scc_index == unix_sk(sk-B)->scc_index <-- Wrong! && sk-A's file refcnt == unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->out_degree ^-- 1 in-flight count for sk-B -> sk-A is dead !? The problem is that unix_add_edge() does not initialise scc_index. Stage 1) is used for heap spraying, making a newly allocated vertex have vertex->scc_index == 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) set by unix_walk_scc() at 1-c. Let's track the max SCC index from the previous unix_walk_scc() call and assign the max + 1 to a new vertex's scc_index. This way, we can continue to avoid Tarjan's algorithm while preventing misjudgments.

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: af_unix: Initialise scc_index in unix_add_edge(). Quang Le reported that the AF_UNIX GC could garbage-collect a receive queue of an alive in-flight socket, with a nice repro. The repro consists of three stages. 1) 1-a. Create a single cyclic reference with many sockets 1-b. close() all sockets 1-c. Trigger GC 2) 2-a. Pass sk-A to an embryo sk-B 2-b. Pass sk-X to sk-X 2-c. Trigger GC 3) 3-a. accept() the embryo sk-B 3-b. Pass sk-B to sk-C 3-c. close() the in-flight sk-A 3-d. Trigger GC As of 2-c, sk-A and sk-X are linked to unix_unvisited_vertices, and unix_walk_scc() groups them into two different SCCs: unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->scc_index = 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) unix_sk(sk-X)->vertex->scc_index = 3 Once GC completes, unix_graph_grouped is set to true. Also, unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is set to true due to sk-X's cyclic self-reference, which makes close() trigger GC. At 3-b, unix_add_edge() allocates unix_sk(sk-B)->vertex and links it to unix_unvisited_vertices. unix_update_graph() is called at 3-a. and 3-b., but neither unix_graph_grouped nor unix_graph_maybe_cyclic is changed because both sk-B's listener and sk-C are not in-flight. 3-c decrements sk-A's file refcnt to 1. Since unix_graph_grouped is true at 3-d, unix_walk_scc_fast() is finally called and iterates 3 sockets sk-A, sk-B, and sk-X: sk-A -> sk-B (-> sk-C) sk-X -> sk-X This is totally fine. All of them are not yet close()d and should be grouped into different SCCs. However, unix_vertex_dead() misjudges that sk-A and sk-B are in the same SCC and sk-A is dead. unix_sk(sk-A)->scc_index == unix_sk(sk-B)->scc_index <-- Wrong! && sk-A's file refcnt == unix_sk(sk-A)->vertex->out_degree ^-- 1 in-flight count for sk-B -> sk-A is dead !? The problem is that unix_add_edge() does not initialise scc_index. Stage 1) is used for heap spraying, making a newly allocated vertex have vertex->scc_index == 2 (UNIX_VERTEX_INDEX_START) set by unix_walk_scc() at 1-c. Let's track the max SCC index from the previous unix_walk_scc() call and assign the max + 1 to a new vertex's scc_index. This way, we can continue to avoid Tarjan's algorithm while preventing misjudgments.

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-2026-1772Google Android: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Google Android ausnutzen, um seine Privilegien zu erhöhen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen, um Informationen offenzulegen, und um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2025-2747Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen Denial of Service

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu erzeugen oder weitere, nicht spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu erlangen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20251210Security Bulletin 10 Dec 2025

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 10 Dec 2025, published on 10 December 2025. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0679Multiples vulnérabilités dans Google Android

indique que la vulnérabilité CVE-2025-48595 est activement exploitée. Solutions Se référer au bulletin de sécurité de l'éditeur pour l'obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation). Documentation Bulletin de sécurité Google Android du 01 juin 2026 https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2026/2026-06-01?hl=fr Référence CVE CVE-2025-22424 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22424 Référence CVE CVE-2025-22426 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22426 Référence CVE CVE-2025-26418 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26418 Référence CVE CVE-2025-32348 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-32348 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40214 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47384 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47384 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47392 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47392 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47400 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47400 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47401 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47401 Référence CVE CVE-2025-47403 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-47403 Référence CVE CVE-2025-48570 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-48570 Référence CVE CVE-2025-48581 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-48581 Référence CVE CVE-2025-48595 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0398Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-21765 Référence CVE CVE-2025-21766 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-21766 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38159 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38159 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38488 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38488 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38563 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38563 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38565 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38565 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38684 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38684 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40044 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40044 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40214 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40242 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40242 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40258 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40284 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40284 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40297 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40297 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68284 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68284 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68285 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68285 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68312 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68312 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68813 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-2025-39797 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.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 sy

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0129Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer un problème de sécurité non spécifié par l'éditeur.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0128Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-40167 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40170 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40170 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40179 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40179 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40190 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40204 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40209 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40209 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40211 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40211 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40212 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40212 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40213 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-2025-40218 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40218 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40219 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40219 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40220 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40220 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40221 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40221 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40223 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40223 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40225 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40225 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40226 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0057Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian LTS

d?id=CVE-2024-47666 Référence CVE CVE-2025-37899 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-37899 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38057 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38057 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38556 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38556 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38593 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38593 Référence CVE CVE-2025-38678 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-38678 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39805 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39805 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40083 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40083 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40211 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40211 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40214 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40248 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40252 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40252 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40253 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40253 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40254 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40254 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40257 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40258 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40259 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40259 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
KISA KrCERT/CC · Korean · KNVD-6820삼성전자 제품 보안 업데이트 권고

| 해결 버전 | |:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| | CVE-2026-0097 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-21352 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-21353 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-25276 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-25277 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-26418 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-40214 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-48612 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-48648 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-59605 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2025-59606 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-0009 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 이전 | SMR Jun-2026 Release 1 | | CVE-2026-0054 | 삼성 갤럭시 (Android 14, 15, 16) | SMR Jun

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
RUGGEDCOM RST2428P (6GK6242-6PA00)
Fixed
Linux: < 6.10, 6.1.159 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.117 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.59 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.17.9 ≤ 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 4 Dec 2025 · Last source change 5 Aug 2026, 12:08 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-2025-201158
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Siemens ProductCERT
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Siemens ProductCERT
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-2025-40214 · cve.blacktree.nl