CVE-2025-39989 | x86/mce: use is_copy_from_user() to determine copy-from-user context

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

公開: 2025-04-18 最終更新: 2026-06-17 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 ソース: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

総合評価: CVE-2025-39989 は低リスク(25.4/100)。CVSS 深刻度は中。悪用される可能性が高い(EPSS 0.19%、9 パーセンタイル) 推奨対応: 悪用情報と EPSS の推移を監視し、必要に応じて優先度を見直してください。

リスクは変動します。再評価に基づき、本ページの表示内容を更新しています。

CVE-2025-39989 の EPSS(Exploit Prediction Scoring System)スコア

EPSS は日次で悪用されやすさの相対度合いを推定します。パーセンタイルは採点済み CVE の中での相対位置(高いほど相対的に深刻)を示します。

# 日付 旧 EPSS スコア 新 EPSS スコア Δ(新 − 旧)
1 2026-06-15 0.03% 0.19% +0.16%
2 2026-05-27 0.06% 0.03% -0.03%
3 2026-02-12 0.06%

EPSS の全履歴 (全 4 件)

CVE-2025-39989 の CVSS(Common Vulnerability Scoring System)指標

この CVE の CVSS 指標。

ベーススコア バージョン 深刻度 ベクトル 悪用しやすさ 影響 スコアの出典
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H クリックして展開
攻撃ベクター (AV:L)
対象ホスト上でコードを実行できること、または別ユーザーの誤操作・悪意ある操作が前提になる。
攻撃の複雑さ (AC:L)
攻撃者が条件を満たせば、レース条件や珍しい構成に依存せずに再現しやすい。
必要な権限 (PR:L)
一般ユーザー権限があれば足り、管理者(root 相当)は不要。
ユーザーの関与 (UI:N)
メールのリンクを開く、マクロを有効にするなど、被害者の協力がなくても成立しうる。
スコープ (S:U)
影響は脆弱コンポーネントと同一のセキュリティ権限・信頼境界の内側に収まる。
機密性への影響 (C:N)
機微情報の漏えいは想定しにくい。
完全性への影響 (I:N)
改ざん・なりすましによる信頼毀損は軽微か、想定されない。
可用性への影響 (A:H)
長時間のサービス停止、データ損壊による復旧不能に近い状態など、利用者に著しい不便を与えうる。
1.8 3.6 [email protected]

CVE-2025-39989 の弱点分類(列挙)

CVE-2025-39989 の OS トラッカー

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-39989 unimportant priority: Debian including 1 source packages (linux), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 4, open 1. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-39989
redhat medium https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-39989
suse medium CVE-2025-39989 severity moderate: SUSE including 52 source package names (cluster-md-kmp-default, dlm-kmp-default, …), 185 product×package rows across 34 product lines (SLES-LTSS-TERADATA 15 SP2, SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7, … (34 product lines)): Known Not Affected 94, Will Not Fix 65, Fixed 26. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-39989/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-39989 medium priority: Ubuntu including 158 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1550 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 1144, ignored 149, released 145, not-affected 74, needed 35, needs-triage 2, pending 1. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-39989

CVE-2025-39989 の影響を受けるソフトウェア/構成

ベンダー 製品 バージョン 生の CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 5.15.58, < 5.16 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 5.17, < 6.6.89 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.7, < 6.12.23 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.13.11 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.14, < 6.14.2 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

CVE-2025-39989 の参考情報

cvelogic Threat Intelligence