BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2025-71152High confidence

net: dsa: properly keep track of conduit reference

Linux · Linux

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

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

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityHighOperational priority:Medium, lowered one band.downgradedsince 11 May 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 21 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

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

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 21 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

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

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.85-1Debian 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.6.18.5-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.5-1Debian 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-2026-4398

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 21 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: dsa: properly keep track of conduit reference Problem description ------------------- DSA has a mumbo-jumbo of reference handling of the conduit net device and its kobject which, sadly, is just wrong and doesn't make sense. There are two distinct problems. 1. The OF path, which uses of_find_net_device_by_node(), never releases the elevated refcount on the conduit's kobject. Nominally, the OF and non-OF paths should result in objects having identical reference counts taken, and it is already suspicious that dsa_dev_to_net_device() has a put_device() call which is missing in dsa_port_parse_of(), but we can actually even verify that an issue exists. With CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE=y, if we run this command "before" and "after" applying this patch: (unbind the conduit driver for net device eno2) echo 0000:00:00.2 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/fsl_enetc/unbind we see these lines in the output diff which appear only with the patch applied: kobject: 'eno2' (ffff002009a3a6b8): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) kobject: '109' (ffff0020099d59a0): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) 2. After we find the conduit interface one way (OF) or another (non-OF), it can get unregistered at any time, and DSA remains with a long-lived, but in this case stale, cpu_dp->conduit pointer. Holding the net device's underlying kobject isn't actually of much help, it just prevents it from being freed (but we never need that kobject directly). What helps us to prevent the net device from being unregistered is the parallel netdev reference mechanism (dev_hold() and dev_put()). Actually we actually use that netdev tracker mechanism implicitly on user ports since commit 2f1e8ea726e9 ("net: dsa: link interfaces with the DSA master to get rid of lockdep warnings"), via netdev_upper_dev_link(). But time still passes at DSA switch probe time between the initial of_find_net_device_by_node() code and the user port creation time, time during which the conduit could unregister itself and DSA wouldn't know about it. So we have to run of_find_net_device_by_node() under rtnl_lock() to prevent that from happening, and release the lock only with the netdev tracker having acquired the reference. Do we need to keep the reference until dsa_unregister_switch() / dsa_switch_shutdown()? 1: Maybe yes. A switch device will still be registered even if all user ports failed to probe, see commit 86f8b1c01a0a ("net: dsa: Do not make user port errors fatal"), and the cpu_dp->conduit pointers remain valid. I haven't audited all call paths to see whether they will actually use the conduit in lack of any user port, but if they do, it seems safer to not rely on user ports for that reference. 2. Definitely yes. We support changing the conduit which a user port is associated to, and we can get into a situation where we've moved all user ports away from a conduit, thus no longer hold any reference to it via the net device tracker. But we shouldn't let it go nonetheless - see the next change in relation to dsa_tree_find_first_conduit() and LAG conduits which disappear. We have to be prepared to return to the physical conduit, so the CPU port must explicitly keep another reference to it. This is also to say: the user ports and their CPU ports may not always keep a reference to the same conduit net device, and both are needed. As for the conduit's kobject for the /sys/class/net/ entry, we don't care about it, we can release it as soon as we hold the net device object itself. History and blame attribution ----------------------------- The code has been refactored so many times, it is very difficult to follow and properly attribute a blame, but I'll try to make a short history which I hope to be correct. We have two distinct probing paths: - one for OF, introduced in 2016 i ---truncated---

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: dsa: properly keep track of conduit reference Problem description ------------------- DSA has a mumbo-jumbo of reference handling of the conduit net device and its kobject which, sadly, is just wrong and doesn't make sense. There are two distinct problems. 1. The OF path, which uses of_find_net_device_by_node(), never releases the elevated refcount on the conduit's kobject. Nominally, the OF and non-OF paths should result in objects having identical reference counts taken, and it is already suspicious that dsa_dev_to_net_device() has a put_device() call which is missing in dsa_port_parse_of(), but we can actually even verify that an issue exists. With CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE=y, if we run this command "before" and "after" applying this patch: (unbind the conduit driver for net device eno2) echo 0000:00:00.2 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/fsl_enetc/unbind we see these lines in the output diff which appear only with the patch applied: kobject: 'eno2' (ffff002009a3a6b8): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) kobject: '109' (ffff0020099d59a0): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) 2. After we find the conduit interface one way (OF) or another (non-OF), it can get unregistered at any time, and DSA remains with a long-lived, but in this case stale, cpu_dp->conduit pointer. Holding the net device's underlying kobject isn't actually of much help, it just prevents it from being freed (but we never need that kobject directly). What helps us to prevent the net device from being unregistered is the parallel netdev reference mechanism (dev_hold() and dev_put()). Actually we actually use that netdev tracker mechanism implicitly on user ports since commit 2f1e8ea726e9 ("net: dsa: link interfaces with the DSA master to get rid of lockdep warnings"), via netdev_upper_dev_link(). But time still passes at DSA switch probe time between the initial of_find_net_device_by_node() code and the user port creation time, time during which the conduit could unregister itself and DSA wouldn't know about it. So we have to run of_find_net_device_by_node() under rtnl_lock() to prevent that from happening, and release the lock only with the netdev tracker having acquired the reference. Do we need to keep the reference until dsa_unregister_switch() / dsa_switch_shutdown()? 1: Maybe yes. A switch device will still be registered even if all user ports failed to probe, see commit 86f8b1c01a0a ("net: dsa: Do not make user port errors fatal"), and the cpu_dp->conduit pointers remain valid. I haven't audited all call paths to see whether they will actually use the conduit in lack of any user port, but if they do, it seems safer to not rely on user ports for that reference. 2. Definitely yes. We support changing the conduit which a user port is associated to, and we can get into a situation where we've moved all user ports away from a conduit, thus no longer hold any reference to it via the net device tracker. But we shouldn't let it go nonetheless - see the next change in relation to dsa_tree_find_first_conduit() and LAG conduits which disappear. We have to be prepared to return to the physical conduit, so the CPU port must explicitly keep another reference to it. This is also to say: the user ports and their CPU ports may not always keep a reference to the same conduit net device, and both are needed. As for the conduit's kobject for the /sys/class/net/ entry, we don't care about it, we can release it as soon as we hold the net device object itself. History and blame attribution ----------------------------- The code has been refactored so many times, it is very difficult to follow and properly attribute a blame, but I'll try to make a short history which I hope to be correct. We have two distinct probing paths: - one for OF, introduced in 2016 i ---truncated---

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 gain additional privileges.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: dsa: properly keep track of conduit reference Problem description ------------------- DSA has a mumbo-jumbo of reference handling of the conduit net device and its kobject which, sadly, is just wrong and doesn't make sense. There are two distinct problems. 1. The OF path, which uses of_find_net_device_by_node(), never releases the elevated refcount on the conduit's kobject. Nominally, the OF and non-OF paths should result in objects having identical reference counts taken, and it is already suspicious that dsa_dev_to_net_device() has a put_device() call which is missing in dsa_port_parse_of(), but we can actually even verify that an issue exists. With CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE=y, if we run this command "before" and "after" applying this patch: (unbind the conduit driver for net device eno2) echo 0000:00:00.2 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/fsl_enetc/unbind we see these lines in the output diff which appear only with the patch applied: kobject: 'eno2' (ffff002009a3a6b8): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) kobject: '109' (ffff0020099d59a0): kobject_release, parent 0000000000000000 (delayed 1000) 2. After we find the conduit interface one way (OF) or another (non-OF), it can get unregistered at any time, and DSA remains with a long-lived, but in this case stale, cpu_dp->conduit pointer. Holding the net device's underlying kobject isn't actually of much help, it just prevents it from being freed (but we never need that kobject directly). What helps us to prevent the net device from being unregistered is the parallel netdev reference mechanism (dev_hold() and dev_put()). Actually we actually use that netdev tracker mechanism implicitly on user ports since commit 2f1e8ea726e9 ("net: dsa: link interfaces with the DSA master to get rid of lockdep warnings"), via netdev_upper_dev_link(). But time still passes at DSA switch probe time between the initial of_find_net_device_by_node() code and the user port creation time, time during which the conduit could unregister itself and DSA wouldn't know about it. So we have to run of_find_net_device_by_node() under rtnl_lock() to prevent that from happening, and release the lock only with the netdev tracker having acquired the reference. Do we need to keep the reference until dsa_unregister_switch() / dsa_switch_shutdown()? 1: Maybe yes. A switch device will still be registered even if all user ports failed to probe, see commit 86f8b1c01a0a ("net: dsa: Do not make user port errors fatal"), and the cpu_dp->conduit pointers remain valid. I haven't audited all call paths to see whether they will actually use the conduit in lack of any user port, but if they do, it seems safer to not rely on user ports for that reference. 2. Definitely yes. We support changing the conduit which a user port is associated to, and we can get into a situation where we've moved all user ports away from a conduit, thus no longer hold any reference to it via the net device tracker. But we shouldn't let it go nonetheless - see the next change in relation to dsa_tree_find_first_conduit() and LAG conduits which disappear. We have to be prepared to return to the physical conduit, so the CPU port must explicitly keep another reference to it. This is also to say: the user ports and their CPU ports may not always keep a reference to the same conduit net device, and both are needed. As for the conduit's kobject for the /sys/class/net/ entry, we don't care about it, we can release it as soon as we hold the net device object itself. History and blame attribution ----------------------------- The code has been refactored so many times, it is very difficult to follow and properly attribute a blame, but I'll try to make a short history which I hope to be correct. We have two distinct probing paths: - one for OF, introduced in 2016 i ---truncated---

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 gain additional privileges.

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 → gain additional privileges
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.
Privilege escalation
A

Official authority intelligence

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

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-0215Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, die möglicherweise zu einer Denial-of-Service- Bedingung führen oder eine Speicherbeschädigung verursachen können.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260128Security Bulletin 28 Jan 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 28 Jan 2026, published on 28 January 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1066Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-40135 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40150 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40150 Référence CVE CVE-2025-54505 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-54505 Référence CVE CVE-2025-54518 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-54518 Référence CVE CVE-2025-62626 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-62626 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68175 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68175 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68239 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68239 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68736 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68736 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71203 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71203 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71221 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71221 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71269 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71287 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71287 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71288 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71288 Référence CVE CVE-2026-22981 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-22981 Référence CVE CVE-2026-22985 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0954Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-68239 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68256 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68263 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68307 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68307 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68358 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68358 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68736 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68736 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71089 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71089 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71150 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71150 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71158 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71182 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71183 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0926Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-68175 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68206 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68239 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68239 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68256 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68307 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68307 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68358 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68358 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68736 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68736 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71150 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71150 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71158 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71182 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71183 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0861Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-68263 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71088 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71088 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71089 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71089 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71090 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71090 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71134 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71134 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71144 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71144 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71155 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71220 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71220 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71222 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71222 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71224 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71224 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71229 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71229 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71231 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71231 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71232 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71232 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71233 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0695Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-37849 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71088 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71088 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71090 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71090 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71134 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71134 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71144 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71144 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71155 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23112 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23112 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0663Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-68823 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71088 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71088 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71090 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71090 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71134 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71134 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71144 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71144 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71155 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71182 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71183 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71183 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71184 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0638Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-68823 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71088 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71088 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71090 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71090 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71134 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71134 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71144 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71144 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71155 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71182 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71183 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71183 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71184 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0548Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian

d?id=CVE-2025-40261 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40358 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40358 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68175 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68175 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68206 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68239 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68239 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68265 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68334 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68334 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68736 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68736 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71067 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71067 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71221 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71221 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71239 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71239 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71265 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71266 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71267 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-22981 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-71125 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71131 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71131 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71132 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71132 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71133 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71133 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71136 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71136 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71137 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71137 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71147 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71147 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71150 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71150 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71154 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71154 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71158 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2025-71125 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71127 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71127 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71131 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71131 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71132 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71132 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71133 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71133 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71136 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71136 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71137 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71137 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71147 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71147 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71150 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71150 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71154 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71154 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71158 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71160 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71160 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71161 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71161 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71162 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71163 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71163 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71180 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-005671LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける不特定の脆弱性

Linuxカーネルにおいてnet: dsa: conduitの参照を適切に追跡する問題が修正されました。この脆弱性は、DSA(Distributed Switch Architecture)におけるconduitネットデバイスのkobject参照カウントの不適切な管理に起因しています。具体的には、of_find_net_device_by_node()がconduitのkobject参照カウントを誤って扱い、解放しないこと、及びconduitインターフェースの登録解除時にCPUポートが古いconduitポインタを保持し続ける問題がありました。これにより、リソースの誤管理やメモリリークが発生する可能性がありました。修正では、rtnl_lock()下での実行と参照カウントの適正管理により、参照追跡と解放の問題を解決しています。

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: 83c0afaec7b730b16c518aecc8e6246ec91b265e < ec2b34acb1894cfc10ed22d8277ca4f11e9f4b23, 83c0afaec7b730b16c518aecc8e6246ec91b265e < b358fc6ff3b35a29f7f677da1c67af67d0d560cb, 83c0afaec7b730b16c518aecc8e6246ec91b265e < 0e766b77ba5093583dfe609fae0aa1545c46dbbd, 83c0afaec7b730b16c518aecc8e6246ec91b265e < 06e219f6a706c367c93051f408ac61417643d2f9, 4.8
Fixed
Linux: < 4.8, 6.6.130 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.78 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.18.4 ≤ 6.18.*, 6.19 ≤ *
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 23 Jan 2026 · Last source change 11 May 2026, 21:55 UTC · CWE not yet assigned

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-2026-4398
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

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-2025-71152 · cve.blacktree.nl