Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2025-21896
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: fuse: revert back to __readahead_folio() for readahead In commit 3eab9d7bc2f4 ("fuse: convert readahead to use folios"), the logic was converted to using the new folio readahead code, which drops the reference on the folio once it is locked, using an inferred reference on the folio. Previously we held a reference on the folio for the entire duration of the readpages call. This is fine, however for the case for splice pipe responses where we will remove the old folio and splice in the new folio (see fuse_try_move_page()), we assume that there is a reference held on the folio for ap->folios, which is no longer the case. To fix this, revert back to __readahead_folio() which allows us to hold the reference on the folio for the duration of readpages until either we drop the reference ourselves in fuse_readpages_end() or the reference is dropped after it's replaced in the page cache in the splice case. This will fix the UAF bug that was reported.
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 analysisMemory is used after it has been freed, so its contents — now potentially attacker-controlled — drive the program's behaviour. With careful heap grooming this becomes code execution. The fix requires disciplined ownership of memory and often a targeted rework of the object lifecycle.
General guidance for the use after free 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
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 6.13, < 6.13.6= 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped6.13.6
Linux Kernel 6.13.6 or later (6.13.x series); Linux Kernel 6.14.1 or later (6.14.x series)
- 1. Identify the currently running kernel version using 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version'
- 2. Check if the system is running a vulnerable kernel version: >= 6.13.0 and < 6.13.6, or exactly 6.14.0
- 3. Update the system package manager and install the latest kernel security updates
- 4. For RHEL/CentOS/Fedora: run 'yum update kernel' or 'dnf update kernel'
- 5. For Debian/Ubuntu: run 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade linux-image-generic' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade'
- 6. For SUSE: run 'zypper update kernel-default'
- 7. After installation, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel: 'systemctl reboot' or 'reboot'
- 8. Verify the new kernel version is loaded using 'uname -r' and confirm it is >= 6.13.6 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-2025-21896 — 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-2025-21896 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