CVE-2025-38349

Summary

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

eventpoll: don't decrement ep refcount while still holding the ep mutex

Jann Horn points out that epoll is decrementing the ep refcount and then doing a

mutex_unlock(&ep->mtx);

afterwards. That's very wrong, because it can lead to a use-after-free.

That pattern is actually fine for the very last reference, because the code in question will delay the actual call to "ep_free(ep)" until after it has unlocked the mutex.

But it's wrong for the much subtler "next to last" case when somebody else may also be dropping their reference and free the ep while we're still using the mutex.

Note that this is true even if that other user is also using the same ep mutex: mutexes, unlike spinlocks, can not be used for object ownership, even if they guarantee mutual exclusion.

A mutex "unlock" operation is not atomic, and as one user is still accessing the mutex as part of unlocking it, another user can come in and get the now released mutex and free the data structure while the first user is still cleaning up.

See our mutex documentation in Documentation/locking/mutex-design.rst, in particular the section [1] about semantics:

"mutex_unlock() may access the mutex structure even after it has
 internally released the lock already - so it's not safe for
 another context to acquire the mutex and assume that the
 mutex_unlock() context is not using the structure anymore"

So if we drop our ep ref before the mutex unlock, but we weren't the last one, we may then unlock the mutex, another user comes in, drops their reference and releases the 'ep' as it now has no users - all while the mutex_unlock() is still accessing it.

Fix this by simply moving the ep refcount dropping to outside the mutex: the refcount itself is atomic, and doesn't need mutex protection (that's the whole point of refcounts: unlike mutexes, they are inherently about object lifetimes).

Affected Software

VendorProductVersion RangeStatus
LinuxLinux58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 521e9ff0b67c66a17d6f9593dfccafaa984aae4caffected
LinuxLinux58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 6dee745bd0aec9d399df674256e7b1ecdb615444affected
LinuxLinux58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 605c18698ecfa99165f36b7f59d3ed503e169814affected
LinuxLinux58c9b016e12855286370dfb704c08498edbc857a < 8c2e52ebbe885c7eeaabd3b7ddcdc1246fc400d2affected
LinuxLinuxf2451def095c1743adcfcb0cb5dadc86034e162aaffected
LinuxLinuxa1f93804449d13f97dabd4b996817de4bf1ed67aaffected
LinuxLinux5.15.209 < 5.16affected
LinuxLinux6.1.175 < 6.2affected
LinuxLinux6.4affected
LinuxLinux0 < 6.4unaffected
LinuxLinux6.6.99 <= 6.6.*unaffected
LinuxLinux6.12.39 <= 6.12.*unaffected
LinuxLinux6.15.7 <= 6.15.*unaffected
LinuxLinux6.16 <= *unaffected

Weaknesses

ADP Enrichment

CISA ADP Vulnrichment

  • SSVC:
  • Exploitation: none
    • Automatable: no
    • Technical Impact: total

References