← Back to KEV catalog

CVE-2025-21875

Exploitation: none CVSS 7.8 HIGH

CVSS base score: 7.8 (High) vendor CNA · v3.1

Score assigned by the vendor's own CVE Numbering Authority (CNA); CISA's Vulnrichment program adds a score only when the CNA omits one.

Vendor: Linux   Product: Linux

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mptcp: always handle address removal under msk socket lock Syzkaller reported a lockdep splat in the PM control path: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 6693 at ./include/net/sock.h:1711 sock_owned_by_me include/net/sock.h:1711 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 6693 at ./include/net/sock.h:1711 msk_owned_by_me net/mptcp/protocol.h:363 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 6693 at ./include/net/sock.h:1711 mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack+0x57c/0x610 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c:788 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6693 Comm: syz.0.205 Not tainted 6.14.0-rc2-syzkaller-00303-gad1b832bf1cf #0 Hardware name: Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 12/27/2024 RIP: 0010:sock_owned_by_me include/net/sock.h:1711 [inline] RIP: 0010:msk_owned_by_me net/mptcp/protocol.h:363 [inline] RIP: 0010:mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack+0x57c/0x610 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c:788 Code: 5b 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e 41 5f 5d c3 cc cc cc cc e8 ca 7b d3 f5 eb b9 e8 c3 7b d3 f5 90 0f 0b 90 e9 dd fb ff ff e8 b5 7b d3 f5 90 <0f> 0b 90 e9 3e fb ff ff 44 89 f1 80 e1 07 38 c1 0f 8c eb fb ff ff RSP: 0000:ffffc900034f6f60 EFLAGS: 00010283 RAX: ffffffff8bee3c2b RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 0000000000080000 RDX: ffffc90004d42000 RSI: 000000000000a407 RDI: 000000000000a408 RBP: ffffc900034f7030 R08: ffffffff8bee37f6 R09: 0100000000000000 R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed100bcc62e4 R12: ffff88805e6316e0 R13: ffff88805e630c00 R14: dffffc0000000000 R15: ffff88805e630c00 FS: 00007f7e9a7e96c0(0000) GS:ffff8880b8600000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000001b2fd18ff8 CR3: 0000000032c24000 CR4: 00000000003526f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> mptcp_pm_remove_addr+0x103/0x1d0 net/mptcp/pm.c:59 mptcp_pm_remove_anno_addr+0x1f4/0x2f0 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c:1486 mptcp_nl_remove_subflow_and_signal_addr net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c:1518 [inline] mptcp_pm_nl_del_addr_doit+0x118d/0x1af0 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c:1629 genl_family_rcv_msg_doit net/netlink/genetlink.c:1115 [inline] genl_family_rcv_msg net/netlink/genetlink.c:1195 [inline] genl_rcv_msg+0xb1f/0xec0 net/netlink/genetlink.c:1210 netlink_rcv_skb+0x206/0x480 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2543 genl_rcv+0x28/0x40 net/netlink/genetlink.c:1219 netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1322 [inline] netlink_unicast+0x7f6/0x990 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1348 netlink_sendmsg+0x8de/0xcb0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1892 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:718 [inline] __sock_sendmsg+0x221/0x270 net/socket.c:733 ____sys_sendmsg+0x53a/0x860 net/socket.c:2573 ___sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2627 [inline] __sys_sendmsg+0x269/0x350 net/socket.c:2659 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f7e9998cde9 Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48 RSP: 002b:00007f7e9a7e9038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000002e RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f7e99ba5fa0 RCX: 00007f7e9998cde9 RDX: 000000002000c094 RSI: 0000400000000000 RDI: 0000000000000007 RBP: 00007f7e99a0e2a0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007f7e99ba5fa0 R15: 00007fff49231088 Indeed the PM can try to send a RM_ADDR over a msk without acquiring first the msk socket lock. The bugged code-path comes from an early optimization: when there are no subflows, the PM should (usually) not send RM_ADDR notifications. The above statement is incorrect, as without locks another process could concur ---truncated---

Research & News Coverage

No mentions found in monitored research blogs or news feeds.

Referenced in Advisories

DateAdvisoryIssuer
2026-10-22 ICSA-26-295-11: Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518(F)-4 PN/DP MFP CISA
2026-07-28 ICSA-26-209-04: Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518(F)-4 PN/DP MFP CISA

Lifecycle Timeline

Each milestone comes from a different source, so gaps between them are gaps in what those sources publish, not evidence that nothing happened. EPSS history for this CVE holds 3 points from 2026-11-05, tracked daily from 2026-11-05; earlier points are weekly, which dates a spike to within a week. Peak probability 0.3% on 2026-11-05.

Published Applicability

Red Hat CSAF/VEX 233 affected · 0 fixed · 42 not affected
OSV.dev (incl. GHSA) 13 affected · 13 fixed · 0 not affected
CVE List v5 (CNA container) 8 affected · 0 fixed · 8 not affected
CVE List v5 (ADP/Vulnrichment) 6 affected · 0 fixed · 0 not affected

Check whether a specific version is affected →

What each source publishes about which product versions carry this vulnerability, kept as written rather than merged. Absence here means no source has published applicability data, not that nothing is affected.

Detection & Exploitation

Scan
none published
Exploit / Pen Test
none published
Network IDS/IPS
none published
Host / SIEM
none published

Blind spot. No public detection — verify by version/patch. Nothing in the monitored scanner, IDS, SIEM or offensive-tool collections references this CVE, so exposure has to be established from asset inventory and patch level rather than from a signature.

Coverage across public collections only: Nuclei and OpenVAS NVT (scan); Snort and Suricata ET Open (network); Sigma and YARA (host/SIEM); Metasploit, Exploit-DB, public GitHub repositories and NVD exploit references (exploit). Absence here means nothing public was found, not that detection is impossible.
GitHub PoC repositories are collected automatically by PoC-in-GitHub (CC0) and filtered to repositories that are still online, contain code, and are starred or at least two weeks old. They are still not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware. Treat them as evidence that code was published, not as code to run.
NVD exploit references are links NVD's analysts tag as exploits; they confirm an exploit was referenced but carry no date. This product uses data from the NVD but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
OpenVAS coverage derives from the Greenbone Community Feed, made available under the Open Database License (ODbL) v1.0; its individual Vulnerability Tests are licensed GNU GPL v2.

No exploit-tool sightings recorded for this CVE.

Metasploit is dated by the first commit of the module file, Exploit-DB by its publication date, and GitHub repositories by their creation date. GitHub PoC repositories are filtered (still online, contain code, starred or at least two weeks old) but not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware, so they show that code was published, not that it works or is safe to run. Evidence tiers are explained on the About page.

Distribution Status

Debian · linux bookworm 6.1.133-1 trixie 6.12.19-1 forky 6.12.19-1 sid 6.12.19-1 scope: local

Where the distribution has shipped a fix, and in which version. Green means the release has resolved it, amber that it is still open. Data from the Debian Security Tracker, used under Debian's MIT / GPLv2+ terms. Debian is upstream of several other distributions, so a fix here often precedes theirs.

CISA Assessment (Vulnrichment / SSVC)

none
no
total
—
7.8 HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
2026-10-15

Federal Remediation Window (BOD 26-04)

No
no
total control
If the asset isRemediate withinTable 1 row
Publicly exposed 14 days 7 of 16
Not publicly exposed Fix on system upgrade 15 of 16

BOD 26-04 replaced the single KEV deadline of BOD 22-01 with four inputs: whether the asset is publicly exposed, KEV status, whether exploitation is automatable, and technical impact. Exposure belongs to each agency's asset, not to the CVE, so both outcomes are shown. Automatable and technical impact come from the CISA assessment above. Days are calendar days; for KEV entries the clock starts on the date it was added, and otherwise when the agency identifies the vulnerability on an asset. Agencies make the final exposure call asset by asset, and may set shorter timelines.

External References