CVE-2025-22072
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: spufs: fix gang directory lifetimes prior to "[POWERPC] spufs: Fix gang destroy leaks" we used to have a problem with gang lifetimes - creation of a gang returns opened gang directory, which normally gets removed when that gets closed, but if somebody has created a context belonging to that gang and kept it alive until the gang got closed, removal failed and we ended up with a leak. Unfortunately, it had been fixed the wrong way. Dentry of gang directory was no longer pinned, and rmdir on close was gone. One problem was that failure of open kept calling simple_rmdir() as cleanup, which meant an unbalanced dput(). Another bug was in the success case - gang creation incremented link count on root directory, but that was no longer undone when gang got destroyed. Fix consists of * reverting the commit in question * adding a counter to gang, protected by ->i_rwsem of gang directory inode. * having it set to 1 at creation time, dropped in both spufs_dir_close() and spufs_gang_close() and bumped in spufs_create_context(), provided that it's not 0. * using simple_recursive_removal() to take the gang directory out when counter reaches zero.
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 analysisA 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>= 2.6.23, < 6.1.134>= 6.2, < 6.6.87>= 6.7, < 6.12.23>= 6.13, < 6.13.11>= 6.14, < 6.14.2= 2.6.22CVSS 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 · scoped6.1.1346.6.876.12.23
6.13.11 (or 6.1.134/6.6.87/6.12.23 depending on current kernel branch)
- 1. Identify current kernel version using 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version'
- 2. Determine which kernel branch you are running (e.g., 6.1.x, 6.2.x-6.5.x, 6.7.x-6.11.x, or 6.13.x)
- 3. For kernel 6.1.x: upgrade to 6.1.134 or later
- 4. For kernel 6.2.x through 6.5.x: upgrade to 6.6.87 or later
- 5. For kernel 6.7.x through 6.11.x: upgrade to 6.12.23 or later
- 6. For kernel 6.13.x: upgrade to 6.13.11 or later
- 7. Use your distribution's package manager to install the new kernel package (e.g., apt-get update && apt-get install linux-image-<version> on Debian/Ubuntu, or yum/dnf on RHEL/CentOS)
- 8. Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
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-2025-22072 — 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-2025-22072 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