<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-01T21:42:02.365981+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-23145</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-23145 — mptcp: fix NULL pointer in can_accept_new_subflow</title>
    <updated>2026-10-01T21:42:02.369502+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>mptcp: fix NULL pointer in can_accept_new_subflow</p>
<p>When testing valkey benchmark tool with MPTCP, the kernel panics in
'mptcp_can_accept_new_subflow' because subflow_req-&gt;msk is NULL.</p>
<p>Call trace:</p>
<p>mptcp_can_accept_new_subflow (./net/mptcp/subflow.c:63 (discriminator 4)) (P)
  subflow_syn_recv_sock (./net/mptcp/subflow.c:854)
  tcp_check_req (./net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c:863)
  tcp_v4_rcv (./net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c:2268)
  ip_protocol_deliver_rcu (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:207)
  ip_local_deliver_finish (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:234)
  ip_local_deliver (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:254)
  ip_rcv_finish (./net/ipv4/ip_input.c:449)
  ...</p>
<p>According to the debug log, the same req received two SYN-ACK in a very
short time, very likely because the client retransmits the syn ack due
to multiple reasons.</p>
<p>Even if the packets are transmitted with a relevant time interval, they
can be processed by the server on different CPUs concurrently). The
'subflow_req-&gt;msk' ownership is transferred to the subflow the first,
and there will be a risk of a null pointer dereference here.</p>
<p>This patch fixes this issue by moving the 'subflow_req-&gt;msk' under the
`own_req == true` conditional.</p>
<p>Note that the !msk check in subflow_hmac_valid() can be dropped, because
the same check already exists under the own_req mpj branch where the
code has been moved to.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-23145"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
