GHSA-RH5V-2XRC-GJ9X
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-11 18:35 – Updated: 2025-11-25 21:32
VLAI?
Details
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfilter: ctnetlink: remove refcounting in expectation dumpers
Same pattern as previous patch: do not keep the expectation object alive via refcount, only store a cookie value and then use that as the skip hint for dump resumption.
AFAICS this has the same issue as the one resolved in the conntrack dumper, when we do if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&exp->use))
to increment the refcount, there is a chance that exp == last, which causes a double-increment of the refcount and subsequent memory leak.
Severity ?
5.5 (Medium)
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-39764"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-09-11T17:15:40Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnetfilter: ctnetlink: remove refcounting in expectation dumpers\n\nSame pattern as previous patch: do not keep the expectation object\nalive via refcount, only store a cookie value and then use that\nas the skip hint for dump resumption.\n\nAFAICS this has the same issue as the one resolved in the conntrack\ndumper, when we do\n if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(\u0026exp-\u003euse))\n\nto increment the refcount, there is a chance that exp == last, which\ncauses a double-increment of the refcount and subsequent memory leak.",
"id": "GHSA-rh5v-2xrc-gj9x",
"modified": "2025-11-25T21:32:04Z",
"published": "2025-09-11T18:35:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-39764"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1492e3dcb2be3aa46d1963da96aa9593e4e4db5a"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a4d634ded4d3d400f115d84f654f316f249531c9"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
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…