Linux KernelOperating system · Linux

CVE-2025-21932

MEDIUM · 5.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-04-01
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 6.12.19 / 6.13.7 or later.
See remediation →
57/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Zero-click Patch available

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 · unedited
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: abort vma_modify() on merge out of memory failure The remainder of vma_modify() relies upon the vmg state remaining pristine after a merge attempt. Usually this is the case, however in the one edge case scenario of a merge attempt failing not due to the specified range being unmergeable, but rather due to an out of memory error arising when attempting to commit the merge, this assumption becomes untrue. This results in vmg->start, end being modified, and thus the proceeding attempts to split the VMA will be done with invalid start/end values. Thankfully, it is likely practically impossible for us to hit this in reality, as it would require a maple tree node pre-allocation failure that would likely never happen due to it being 'too small to fail', i.e. the kernel would simply keep retrying reclaim until it succeeded. However, this scenario remains theoretically possible, and what we are doing here is wrong so we must correct it. The safest option is, when this scenario occurs, to simply give up the operation. If we cannot allocate memory to merge, then we cannot allocate memory to split either (perhaps moreso!). Any scenario where this would be happening would be under very extreme (likely fatal) memory pressure, so it's best we give up early. So there is no doubt it is appropriate to simply bail out in this scenario. However, in general we must if at all possible never assume VMG state is stable after a merge attempt, since merge operations update VMG fields. As a result, additionally also make this clear by storing start, end in local variables. The issue was reported originally by syzkaller, and by Brad Spengler (via an off-list discussion), and in both instances it manifested as a triggering of the assert: VM_WARN_ON_VMG(start >= end, vmg); In vma_merge_existing_range(). It seems at least one scenario in which this is occurring is one in which the merge being attempted is due to an madvise() across multiple VMAs which looks like this: start end |<------>| |----------|------| | vma | next | |----------|------| When madvise_walk_vmas() is invoked, we first find vma in the above (determining prev to be equal to vma as we are offset into vma), and then enter the loop. We determine the end of vma that forms part of the range we are madvise()'ing by setting 'tmp' to this value: /* Here vma->vm_start <= start < (end|vma->vm_end) */ tmp = vma->vm_end; We then invoke the madvise() operation via visit(), letting prev get updated to point to vma as part of the operation: /* Here vma->vm_start <= start < tmp <= (end|vma->vm_end). */ error = visit(vma, &prev, start, tmp, arg); Where the visit() function pointer in this instance is madvise_vma_behavior(). As observed in syzkaller reports, it is ultimately madvise_update_vma() that is invoked, calling vma_modify_flags_name() and vma_modify() in turn. Then, in vma_modify(), we attempt the merge: merged = vma_merge_existing_range(vmg); if (merged) return merged; We invoke this with vmg->start, end set to start, tmp as such: start tmp |<--->| |----------|------| | vma | next | |----------|------| We find ourselves in the merge right scenario, but the one in which we cannot remove the middle (we are offset into vma). Here we have a special case where vmg->start, end get set to perhaps unintuitive values - we intended to shrink the middle VMA and expand the next. This means vmg->start, end are set to... vma->vm_start, start. Now the commit_merge() fails, and vmg->start, end are left like this. This means we return to the rest of vma_modify() with vmg->start, end (here denoted as start', end') set as: start' end' |<-->| |----------|------| | vma | next | |----------|------| So we now erroneously try to split accordingly. This is where the unfortunate ---truncated---

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 analysis

A detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.

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
Affected:>= 6.12, < 6.12.19>= 6.13, < 6.13.7= 6.14

CVSS 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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 6.12.19 / 6.13.7 or later
Fixed in 6.12.196.13.7
Vendor patch git.kernel.org →
Recommended fix High confidence

6.12.19, 6.13.7, or patched 6.14.x

  1. Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.12.19 or later for the 6.12 branch
  2. Alternatively, upgrade to version 6.13.7 or later for the 6.13 branch
  3. Alternatively, upgrade to a patched 6.14.x version (6.14.1 or later if available)
Caveat Kernel upgrades may require system reboot and could introduce compatibility issues with third-party kernel modules. Ensure all dependent modules are compatible with the new kernel version.

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can perform the upgrade in your staging environment and verify nothing breaks — typical engagement from $1,600. Get the upgrade done

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-21932 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-21932 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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