CVE-2025-21809 [Medium] | Security Vulnerability in Linux Kernel

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rxrpc, afs: Fix peer hash locking vs RCU callback In its address list, afs now retains pointers to and refs on one or more rxrpc_peer objects. The address list is freed under RCU and at this time, it puts the refs on those peers. Now, when an rxrpc_peer object runs out of refs, it gets removed from the peer hash table and, for that, rxrpc has to take a spinlock. However, it is now being called from afs's RCU cleanup, which takes place in BH context - but it is just taking an ordinary spinlock. The put may also be called from non-BH context, and so there exists the possibility of deadlock if the BH-based RCU cleanup happens whilst the hash spinlock is held. This led to the attached lockdep complaint. Fix this by changing spinlocks of rxnet->peer_hash_lock back to BH-disabling locks. ================================ WARNING: inconsistent lock state 6.13.0-rc5-build2+ #1223 Tainted: G E -------------------------------- inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage. swapper/1/0 [HC0[0]:SC1[1]:HE1:SE0] takes: ffff88810babe228 (&rxnet->peer_hash_lock){+.?.}-{3:3}, at: rxrpc_put_peer+0xcb/0x180 {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at: mark_usage+0x164/0x180 __lock_acquire+0x544/0x990 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 _raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40 rxrpc_peer_keepalive_worker+0x144/0x440 process_one_work+0x486/0x7c0 process_scheduled_works+0x73/0x90 worker_thread+0x1c8/0x2a0 kthread+0x19b/0x1b0 ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 irq event stamp: 972402 hardirqs last enabled at (972402): [<ffffffff8244360e>] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x2e/0x50 hardirqs last disabled at (972401): [<ffffffff82443328>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x18/0x60 softirqs last enabled at (972300): [<ffffffff810ffbbe>] handle_softirqs+0x3ee/0x430 softirqs last disabled at (972313): [<ffffffff810ffc54>] __irq_exit_rcu+0x44/0x110 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&rxnet->peer_hash_lock); <Interrupt> lock(&rxnet->peer_hash_lock); *** DEADLOCK *** 1 lock held by swapper/1/0: #0: ffffffff83576be0 (rcu_callback){....}-{0:0}, at: rcu_lock_acquire+0x7/0x30 stack backtrace: CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Tainted: G E 6.13.0-rc5-build2+ #1223 Tainted: [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014 Call Trace: <IRQ> dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x80 print_usage_bug.part.0+0x227/0x240 valid_state+0x53/0x70 mark_lock_irq+0xa5/0x2f0 mark_lock+0xf7/0x170 mark_usage+0xe1/0x180 __lock_acquire+0x544/0x990 lock_acquire.part.0+0x103/0x280 _raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40 rxrpc_put_peer+0xcb/0x180 afs_free_addrlist+0x46/0x90 [kafs] rcu_do_batch+0x2d2/0x640 rcu_core+0x2f7/0x350 handle_softirqs+0x1ee/0x430 __irq_exit_rcu+0x44/0x110 irq_exit_rcu+0xa/0x30 sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x7f/0xa0 </IRQ>

#	Date	Old EPSS score	New EPSS score	Delta (New - Old)
1	2025-02-28	—	0.04%	—

Date

Old EPSS score

New EPSS score

Delta (New - Old)

2025-02-28

—

0.04%

—

Base score	Version	Severity	Vector	Exploitability	Impact	Score source
5.5	3.1	MEDIUM	`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H` Click to expand Attack vector (AV:L) They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by. Attack complexity (AC:L) Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup. Privileges required (PR:L) A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin. User interaction (UI:N) Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping. Scope (S:U) Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems. Confidentiality (C:N) Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way. Integrity (I:N) Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged. Availability (A:H) Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.	1.8	3.6	[email protected]
5.5	3.1	MEDIUM	`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H` Click to expand Attack vector (AV:L) They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by. Attack complexity (AC:L) Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup. Privileges required (PR:L) A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin. User interaction (UI:N) Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping. Scope (S:U) Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems. Confidentiality (C:N) Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way. Integrity (I:N) Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged. Availability (A:H) Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.	1.8	3.6	134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

Base score

Version

Severity

Vector

Exploitability

Impact

Score source

5.5

3.1

MEDIUM

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand

Attack vector (AV:L): They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L): Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L): A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N): Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U): Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N): Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N): Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H): Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.

1.8

3.6

[email protected]

5.5

3.1

MEDIUM

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand

Attack vector (AV:L): They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L): Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L): A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N): Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U): Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N): Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N): Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H): Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.

1.8

3.6

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-21809

vendor	priority	summary	link
`debian`	unimportant	CVE-2025-21809 unimportant priority: Debian including 1 source packages (linux), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5.	https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-21809
`redhat`	medium	—	https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21809
`suse`	medium	CVE-2025-21809 severity moderate: SUSE including 52 source package names (cluster-md-kmp-default, dlm-kmp-default, …), 293 product×package rows across 54 product lines (SLES-LTSS-TERADATA 15 SP2, SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 12 SP5, … (54 product lines)): Known Not Affected 267, Fixed 26.	https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21809/
`ubuntu`	medium	CVE-2025-21809 medium priority: Ubuntu including 150 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1487 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 1097, ignored 148, released 128, not-affected 114.	https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-21809

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-21809

Vendor	Product	Version	Raw CPE
linux	linux_kernel	>= 6.7.3, < 6.12.13	cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel::::::::
linux	linux_kernel	>= 6.13, < 6.13.2	cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel::::::::

References for CVE-2025-21809

URL	Tags
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0e77dd41689637ac4e1b8fe0f27541f373640855	Patch
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/10ba5a3d57af20e494e0d979d1894260989235dd	Patch
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/79d458c13056559d49b5e41fbc4b6890e68cf65b	Patch

URL

CVE-2025-21809 | rxrpc, afs: Fix peer hash locking vs RCU callback

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2025-21809

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-21809

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-21809

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-21809

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-21809

References for CVE-2025-21809