Vulnerability Database

374,022

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2025-38643 — linux / linux_kernel

Improper Locking

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

wifi: cfg80211: Add missing lock in cfg80211_check_and_end_cac()

Callers of wdev_chandef() must hold the wiphy mutex.

But the worker cfg80211_propagate_cac_done_wk() never takes the lock. Which triggers the warning below with the mesh_peer_connected_dfs test from hostapd and not (yet) released mac80211 code changes:

WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 495 at net/wireless/chan.c:1552 wdev_chandef+0x60/0x165 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 495 Comm: kworker/u4:2 Not tainted 6.14.0-rc5-wt-g03960e6f9d47 #33 13c287eeabfe1efea01c0bcc863723ab082e17cf Workqueue: cfg80211 cfg80211_propagate_cac_done_wk Stack: 00000000 00000001 ffffff00 6093267c 00000000 6002ec30 6d577c50 60037608 00000000 67e8d108 6063717b 00000000 Call Trace: [<6002ec30>] ? _printk+0x0/0x98 [<6003c2b3>] show_stack+0x10e/0x11a [<6002ec30>] ? _printk+0x0/0x98 [<60037608>] dump_stack_lvl+0x71/0xb8 [<6063717b>] ? wdev_chandef+0x60/0x165 [<6003766d>] dump_stack+0x1e/0x20 [<6005d1b7>] __warn+0x101/0x20f [<6005d3a8>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0xe3/0x15d [<600b0c5c>] ? mark_lock.part.0+0x0/0x4ec [<60751191>] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x0/0x16 [<600b11a2>] ? mark_held_locks+0x5a/0x6e [<6005d2c5>] ? warn_slowpath_fmt+0x0/0x15d [<60052e53>] ? unblock_signals+0x3a/0xe7 [<60052f2d>] ? um_set_signals+0x2d/0x43 [<60751191>] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x0/0x16 [<607508b2>] ? lock_is_held_type+0x207/0x21f [<6063717b>] wdev_chandef+0x60/0x165 [<605f89b4>] regulatory_propagate_dfs_state+0x247/0x43f [<60052f00>] ? um_set_signals+0x0/0x43 [<605e6bfd>] cfg80211_propagate_cac_done_wk+0x3a/0x4a [<6007e460>] process_scheduled_works+0x3bc/0x60e [<6007d0ec>] ? move_linked_works+0x4d/0x81 [<6007d120>] ? assign_work+0x0/0xaa [<6007f81f>] worker_thread+0x220/0x2dc [<600786ef>] ? set_pf_worker+0x0/0x57 [<60087c96>] ? to_kthread+0x0/0x43 [<6008ab3c>] kthread+0x2d3/0x2e2 [<6007f5ff>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x2dc [<6006c05b>] ? calculate_sigpending+0x0/0x56 [<6003b37d>] new_thread_handler+0x4a/0x64 irq event stamp: 614611 hardirqs last enabled at (614621): [<00000000600bc96b>] __up_console_sem+0x82/0xaf hardirqs last disabled at (614630): [<00000000600bc92c>] __up_console_sem+0x43/0xaf softirqs last enabled at (614268): [<00000000606c55c6>] __ieee80211_wake_queue+0x933/0x985 softirqs last disabled at (614266): [<00000000606c52d6>] __ieee80211_wake_queue+0x643/0x985

  • Published: Aug 22, 2025
  • Updated: Dec 2, 2025
  • CVE: CVE-2025-38643
  • Severity: Medium
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 8.8
  • AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.