CVE-2025-21850
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nvmet: Fix crash when a namespace is disabled The namespace percpu counter protects pending I/O, and we can only safely diable the namespace once the counter drop to zero. Otherwise we end up with a crash when running blktests/nvme/058 (eg for loop transport): [ 2352.930426] [ T53909] Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc0000000005: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN PTI [ 2352.930431] [ T53909] KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000028-0x000000000000002f] [ 2352.930434] [ T53909] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 53909 Comm: kworker/u16:5 Tainted: G W 6.13.0-rc6 #232 [ 2352.930438] [ T53909] Tainted: [W]=WARN [ 2352.930440] [ T53909] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.3-3.fc41 04/01/2014 [ 2352.930443] [ T53909] Workqueue: nvmet-wq nvme_loop_execute_work [nvme_loop] [ 2352.930449] [ T53909] RIP: 0010:blkcg_set_ioprio+0x44/0x180 as the queue is already torn down when calling submit_bio(); So we need to init the percpu counter in nvmet_ns_enable(), and wait for it to drop to zero in nvmet_ns_disable() to avoid having I/O pending after the namespace has been disabled.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisCrafted input drives a loop whose exit condition is never satisfied, hanging the thread and starving the service of the resource it occupies. A single request can be enough to take a worker down. Remediation is bounding iteration counts and validating the conditions that are supposed to terminate the loop.
General guidance for the infinite loop class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 6.13, < 6.13.5= 6.14CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.13.5
Linux Kernel 6.13.5 or later, or 6.14.1 or later (depending on which branch is in use)
- Check current kernel version using `uname -r`
- Identify the distribution's available kernel packages using package manager (e.g., `apt-cache policy linux-image-*`, `yum list kernel`, or `dnf list kernel`)
- Upgrade kernel to version 6.13.5 or later for the 6.13.x branch, or version 6.14.1 or later if available
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel using `systemctl reboot` or `shutdown -r now`
- Verify the new kernel is running with `uname -r` and confirm it shows 6.13.5+ or 6.14.1+
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-21850 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-21850 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data