Vulnerability Database

373,546

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2025-38492 — linux / linux_kernel

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

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

netfs: Fix race between cache write completion and ALL_QUEUED being set

When netfslib is issuing subrequests, the subrequests start processing immediately and may complete before we reach the end of the issuing function. At the end of the issuing function we set NETFS_RREQ_ALL_QUEUED to indicate to the collector that we aren't going to issue any more subreqs and that it can do the final notifications and cleanup.

Now, this isn't a problem if the request is synchronous (NETFS_RREQ_OFFLOAD_COLLECTION is unset) as the result collection will be done in-thread and we're guaranteed an opportunity to run the collector.

However, if the request is asynchronous, collection is primarily triggered by the termination of subrequests queuing it on a workqueue. Now, a race can occur here if the app thread sets ALL_QUEUED after the last subrequest terminates.

This can happen most easily with the copy2cache code (as used by Ceph) where, in the collection routine of a read request, an asynchronous write request is spawned to copy data to the cache. Folios are added to the write request as they're unlocked, but there may be a delay before ALL_QUEUED is set as the write subrequests may complete before we get there.

If all the write subreqs have finished by the ALL_QUEUED point, no further events happen and the collection never happens, leaving the request hanging.

Fix this by queuing the collector after setting ALL_QUEUED. This is a bit heavy-handed and it may be sufficient to do it only if there are no extant subreqs.

Also add a tracepoint to cross-reference both requests in a copy-to-request operation and add a trace to the netfs_rreq tracepoint to indicate the setting of ALL_QUEUED.

  • Published: Jul 28, 2025
  • Updated: Nov 20, 2025
  • CVE: CVE-2025-38492
  • Severity: Low
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Low
  • Score: 4.7
  • AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

CWEs:

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.