Vulnerability in Linux Kernel
CVSS Skor
5.5
EPSS İhtimal
%0.1
Risk Skoru
0.0
Yayın
1 yıl önce
Etkilenen ürün ve sürüm için yayımlanan güvenlik güncellemesini uygulayın.
Envanterimdeki Etkisi
Yalnızca hesabınıza eklediğiniz kişisel ürünler değerlendirilir; kurumsal envanter burada görünmez.
Oturum kontrol ediliyor…
Zafiyet Açıklaması
DayBreach CVE AI Araştırması
CVE-2025-39915 için toplanan üretici, dağıtım, yama ve güvenlik kaynağı kayıtlarını karşılaştırıp kanıt bağlantılı bir açıklama hazırlayalım.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phy: transfer phy_config_inband() locking responsibility to phylink Problem description =================== Lockdep reports a possible circular locking dependency (AB/BA) between &pl->state_mutex and &phy->lock, as follows. phylink_resolve() // acquires &pl->state_mutex -> phylink_major_config() -> phy_config_inband() // acquires &pl->phydev->lock whereas all the other call sites where &pl->state_mutex and &pl->phydev->lock have the locking scheme reversed. Everywhere else, &pl->phydev->lock is acquired at the top level, and &pl->state_mutex at the lower level. A clear example is phylink_bringup_phy(). The outlier is the newly introduced phy_config_inband() and the existing lock order is the correct one. To understand why it cannot be the other way around, it is sufficient to consider phylink_phy_change(), phylink's callback from the PHY device's phy->phy_link_change() virtual method, invoked by the PHY state machine. phy_link_up() and phy_link_down(), the (indirect) callers of phylink_phy_change(), are called with &phydev->lock acquired. Then phylink_phy_change() acquires its own &pl->state_mutex, to serialize changes made to its pl->phy_state and pl->link_config. So all other instances of &pl->state_mutex and &phydev->lock must be consistent with this order. Problem impact ============== I think the kernel runs a serious deadlock risk if an existing phylink_resolve() thread, which results in a phy_config_inband() call, is concurrent with a phy_link_up() or phy_link_down() call, which will deadlock on &pl->state_mutex in phylink_phy_change(). Practically speaking, the impact may be limited by the slow speed of the medium auto-negotiation protocol, which makes it unlikely for the current state to still be unresolved when a new one is detected, but I think the problem is there. Nonetheless, the problem was discovered using lockdep. Proposed solution ================= Practically speaking, the phy_config_inband() requirement of having phydev->lock acquired must transfer to the caller (phylink is the only caller). There, it must bubble up until immediately before &pl->state_mutex is acquired, for the cases where that takes place. Solution details, considerations, notes ======================================= This is the phy_config_inband() call graph: sfp_upstream_ops :: connect_phy() | v phylink_sfp_connect_phy() | v phylink_sfp_config_phy() | | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_insert() | | | v | phylink_sfp_module_insert() | | | | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_start() | | | | | v | | phylink_sfp_module_start() | | | | v v | phylink_sfp_config_optical() phylink_start() | | | phylink_resume() v v | | phylink_sfp_set_config() | | | v v v phylink_mac_initial_config() | phylink_resolve() | | phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set() v v v phylink_major_config() | v phy_config_inband() phylink_major_config() caller #1, phylink_mac_initial_config(), does not acquire &pl->state_mutex nor do its callers. It must acquire &pl->phydev->lock prior to calling phylink_major_config(). phylink_major_config() caller #2, phylink_resolve() acquires &pl->state_mutex, thus also needs to acquire &pl->phydev->lock. phylink_major_config() caller #3, phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set(), is completely uninteresting, because it only call ---truncated---
IMPACT — Etkilenen Ürünler ve Yazılımlar
RED HAT CSAF/VEX — Ürün Etki Kontrolü
SCORING — CVSS Çoklu Kaynak Skoru
CVSS Scores
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardized framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and display CVSS scores from various sources for each CVE.
| SCORE | VERSION | SEVERITY | VECTOR | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.5 | CVSS V31 | MEDIUM | CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | NVD |
Yama ve İyileştirme Rehberi (Solution)
Solution & Remediation Advisory
4 doğrulanmış yama veya düzeltilmiş sürüm kanıtı bulundu.
Public exploit ve aktif sömürü durumu
Doğrulanmış exploit istihbaratı
Bu CVE için henüz doğrulanmış public PoC, exploit repository’si veya Metasploit modülü bulunamadı.
Zafiyet Dağılımı ve Saldırı Kalıpları (CWE & CAPEC)
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes the common flaws or weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2025-39915 is associated with the following CWEs:
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2025-39915 weaknesses.
Saldırı Vektörü ve Erişilebilirlik Karakteristiği
Resmi Kaynaklar ve Danışma Bültenleri
İlgili Benzer Açıklar
Bu açığı API ile alın
Etkilenen ürünler, sürüm aralıkları, istismar durumu ve yama bilgisi tek istekte; ücretsiz anahtarla.
curl -H "x-api-key: $DAYBREACH_API_KEY" \ "https://api.daybreach.dev/api/v1/intel/cves/CVE-2025-39915"