GHSA-96WC-H5C4-3F6J

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-16 15:32 – Updated: 2025-11-03 18:31
VLAI?
Details

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

fs/smb: Fix inconsistent refcnt update

A possible inconsistent update of refcount was identified in smb2_compound_op. Such inconsistent update could lead to possible resource leaks.

Why it is a possible bug: 1. In the comment section of the function, it clearly states that the reference to cfile should be dropped after calling this function. 2. Every control flow path would check and drop the reference to cfile, except the patched one. 3. Existing callers would not handle refcount update of cfile if -ENOMEM is returned.

To fix the bug, an extra goto label "out" is added, to make sure that the cleanup logic would always be respected. As the problem is caused by the allocation failure of vars, the cleanup logic between label "finished" and "out" can be safely ignored. According to the definition of function is_replayable_error, the error code of "-ENOMEM" is not recoverable. Therefore, the replay logic also gets ignored.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-39819"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-09-16T13:15:58Z",
    "severity": null
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nfs/smb: Fix inconsistent refcnt update\n\nA possible inconsistent update of refcount was identified in `smb2_compound_op`.\nSuch inconsistent update could lead to possible resource leaks.\n\nWhy it is a possible bug:\n1. In the comment section of the function, it clearly states that the\nreference to `cfile` should be dropped after calling this function.\n2. Every control flow path would check and drop the reference to\n`cfile`, except the patched one.\n3. Existing callers would not handle refcount update of `cfile` if\n-ENOMEM is returned.\n\nTo fix the bug, an extra goto label \"out\" is added, to make sure that the\ncleanup logic would always be respected. As the problem is caused by the\nallocation failure of `vars`, the cleanup logic between label \"finished\"\nand \"out\" can be safely ignored. According to the definition of function\n`is_replayable_error`, the error code of \"-ENOMEM\" is not recoverable.\nTherefore, the replay logic also gets ignored.",
  "id": "GHSA-96wc-h5c4-3f6j",
  "modified": "2025-11-03T18:31:41Z",
  "published": "2025-09-16T15:32:35Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-39819"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3fc11ff13fbc2749871d6ac2141685cf54699997"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4191ea1f0bb3e27d65c5dcde7bd00e709ec67141"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4735f5991f51468b85affb8366b7067248457a71"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ab529e6ca1f67bcf31f3ea80c72bffde2e9e053e"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/cc82c6dff548f0066a51a6e577c7454e7d26a968"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/10/msg00008.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

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…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…