Vulnerability Database

373,546

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2025-38372 — linux / linux_kernel

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

RDMA/mlx5: Fix unsafe xarray access in implicit ODP handling

__xa_store() and __xa_erase() were used without holding the proper lock, which led to a lockdep warning due to unsafe RCU usage. This patch replaces them with xa_store() and xa_erase(), which perform the necessary locking internally.

============================= WARNING: suspicious RCPU usage 6.14.0-rc7_for_upstream_debug_2025_03_18_15_01 #1 Not tainted

./include/linux/xarray.h:1211 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage!

other info that might help us debug this:

rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1 3 locks held by kworker/u136:0/219: at: process_one_work+0xbe4/0x15f0 process_one_work+0x75c/0x15f0 pagefault_mr+0x9a5/0x1390 [mlx5_ib]

stack backtrace: CPU: 14 UID: 0 PID: 219 Comm: kworker/u136:0 Not tainted 6.14.0-rc7_for_upstream_debug_2025_03_18_15_01 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 Workqueue: mlx5_ib_page_fault mlx5_ib_eqe_pf_action [mlx5_ib] Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0xa8/0xc0 lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x1e6/0x260 xas_create+0xb8a/0xee0 xas_store+0x73/0x14c0 __xa_store+0x13c/0x220 ? xa_store_range+0x390/0x390 ? spin_bug+0x1d0/0x1d0 pagefault_mr+0xcb5/0x1390 [mlx5_ib] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x1f/0x30 mlx5_ib_eqe_pf_action+0x3be/0x2620 [mlx5_ib] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400 ? mlx5_ib_invalidate_range+0xcb0/0xcb0 [mlx5_ib] process_one_work+0x7db/0x15f0 ? pwq_dec_nr_in_flight+0xda0/0xda0 ? assign_work+0x168/0x240 worker_thread+0x57d/0xcd0 ? rescuer_thread+0xc40/0xc40 kthread+0x3b3/0x800 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ? lock_downgrade+0x680/0x680 ? do_raw_spin_lock+0x12d/0x270 ? spin_bug+0x1d0/0x1d0 ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x284/0x9e0 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x284/0x400 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x70 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20

  • Published: Jul 25, 2025
  • Updated: Nov 19, 2025
  • CVE: CVE-2025-38372
  • Severity: Medium
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 7.8
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

No CWE or OWASP classifications available.

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.