FKIE_CVE-2025-37856
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2025-05-09 07:16 - Updated: 2025-11-12 20:08
Severity ?
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: harden block_group::bg_list against list_del() races
As far as I can tell, these calls of list_del_init() on bg_list cannot
run concurrently with btrfs_mark_bg_unused() or btrfs_mark_bg_to_reclaim(),
as they are in transaction error paths and situations where the block
group is readonly.
However, if there is any chance at all of racing with mark_bg_unused(),
or a different future user of bg_list, better to be safe than sorry.
Otherwise we risk the following interleaving (bg_list refcount in parens)
T1 (some random op) T2 (btrfs_mark_bg_unused)
!list_empty(&bg->bg_list); (1)
list_del_init(&bg->bg_list); (1)
list_move_tail (1)
btrfs_put_block_group (0)
btrfs_delete_unused_bgs
bg = list_first_entry
list_del_init(&bg->bg_list);
btrfs_put_block_group(bg); (-1)
Ultimately, this results in a broken ref count that hits zero one deref
early and the real final deref underflows the refcount, resulting in a WARNING.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | * |
{
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "C87CF81F-5426-4E15-8A61-B8F0E6046484",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.12.24",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "4A475784-BF3B-4514-81EE-49C8522FB24A",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.13.12",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.13",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "483E2E15-2135-4EC6-AB64-16282C5EF704",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.14.3",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.14",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbtrfs: harden block_group::bg_list against list_del() races\n\nAs far as I can tell, these calls of list_del_init() on bg_list cannot\nrun concurrently with btrfs_mark_bg_unused() or btrfs_mark_bg_to_reclaim(),\nas they are in transaction error paths and situations where the block\ngroup is readonly.\n\nHowever, if there is any chance at all of racing with mark_bg_unused(),\nor a different future user of bg_list, better to be safe than sorry.\n\nOtherwise we risk the following interleaving (bg_list refcount in parens)\n\nT1 (some random op) T2 (btrfs_mark_bg_unused)\n !list_empty(\u0026bg-\u003ebg_list); (1)\nlist_del_init(\u0026bg-\u003ebg_list); (1)\n list_move_tail (1)\nbtrfs_put_block_group (0)\n btrfs_delete_unused_bgs\n bg = list_first_entry\n list_del_init(\u0026bg-\u003ebg_list);\n btrfs_put_block_group(bg); (-1)\n\nUltimately, this results in a broken ref count that hits zero one deref\nearly and the real final deref underflows the refcount, resulting in a WARNING."
},
{
"lang": "es",
"value": "En el kernel de Linux, se ha resuelto la siguiente vulnerabilidad: btrfs: endurecer block_group::bg_list contra ejecuciones list_del() Hasta donde puedo decir, estas llamadas de list_del_init() en bg_list no se pueden ejecutar simult\u00e1neamente con btrfs_mark_bg_unused() o btrfs_mark_bg_to_reclaim(), ya que est\u00e1n en rutas de error de transacci\u00f3n y situaciones en las que el grupo de bloques es de solo lectura. Sin embargo, si hay alguna posibilidad de competir con mark_bg_unused(), o con un futuro usuario diferente de bg_list, m\u00e1s vale prevenir que curar. De lo contrario, nos arriesgamos al siguiente intercalado (bg_list refcount entre par\u00e9ntesis) T1 (alguna operaci\u00f3n aleatoria) T2 (btrfs_mark_bg_unused) !list_empty(\u0026amp;bg-\u0026gt;bg_list); (1) list_del_init(\u0026amp;bg-\u0026gt;bg_list); (1) list_move_tail (1) btrfs_put_block_group (0) btrfs_delete_unused_bgs bg = list_first_entry list_del_init(\u0026amp;bg-\u0026gt;bg_list); btrfs_put_block_group(bg); (-1) En \u00faltima instancia, esto da como resultado un recuento de referencias roto que llega a cero un deref antes y el deref final real desborda el recuento de referencias, lo que genera una ADVERTENCIA."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2025-37856",
"lastModified": "2025-11-12T20:08:08.820",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 5.5,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.8,
"impactScore": 3.6,
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
},
"published": "2025-05-09T07:16:06.593",
"references": [
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/185fd73e5ac06027c4be9a129e59193f6a3ef202"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7511e29cf1355b2c47d0effb39e463119913e2f6"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/909e60fb469d4101c6b08cf6e622efb062bb24a1"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/bf089c4d1141b27332c092b1dcca5022c415a3b6"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "NVD-CWE-noinfo"
}
],
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…