ghsa-93m4-3786-5phj
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-07-10 09:32
Modified
2025-07-10 09:32
VLAI Severity ?
Details
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fs/fhandle.c: fix a race in call of has_locked_children()
may_decode_fh() is calling has_locked_children() while holding no locks. That's an oopsable race...
The rest of the callers are safe since they are holding namespace_sem and are guaranteed a positive refcount on the mount in question.
Rename the current has_locked_children() to __has_locked_children(), make it static and switch the fs/namespace.c users to it.
Make has_locked_children() a wrapper for __has_locked_children(), calling the latter under read_seqlock_excl(&mount_lock).
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2025-38306" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2025-07-10T08:15:29Z", "severity": null }, "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nfs/fhandle.c: fix a race in call of has_locked_children()\n\nmay_decode_fh() is calling has_locked_children() while holding no locks.\nThat\u0027s an oopsable race...\n\nThe rest of the callers are safe since they are holding namespace_sem and\nare guaranteed a positive refcount on the mount in question.\n\nRename the current has_locked_children() to __has_locked_children(), make\nit static and switch the fs/namespace.c users to it.\n\nMake has_locked_children() a wrapper for __has_locked_children(), calling\nthe latter under read_seqlock_excl(\u0026mount_lock).", "id": "GHSA-93m4-3786-5phj", "modified": "2025-07-10T09:32:30Z", "published": "2025-07-10T09:32:30Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-38306" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1f282cdc1d219c4a557f7009e81bc792820d9d9a" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/287c7d34eedd37af1272dfb3b6e8656f4f026424" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [] }
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…