CVE-2025-38594
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: iommu/vt-d: Fix UAF on sva unbind with pending IOPFs Commit 17fce9d2336d ("iommu/vt-d: Put iopf enablement in domain attach path") disables IOPF on device by removing the device from its IOMMU's IOPF queue when the last IOPF-capable domain is detached from the device. Unfortunately, it did this in a wrong place where there are still pending IOPFs. As a result, a use-after-free error is potentially triggered and eventually a kernel panic with a kernel trace similar to the following: refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 313 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xd8/0xe0 Workqueue: iopf_queue/dmar0-iopfq iommu_sva_handle_iopf Call Trace: <TASK> iopf_free_group+0xe/0x20 process_one_work+0x197/0x3d0 worker_thread+0x23a/0x350 ? rescuer_thread+0x4a0/0x4a0 kthread+0xf8/0x230 ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x81/0x260 ? kthreads_online_cpu+0x110/0x110 ? kthreads_online_cpu+0x110/0x110 ret_from_fork+0x13b/0x170 ? kthreads_online_cpu+0x110/0x110 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 </TASK> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- The intel_pasid_tear_down_entry() function is responsible for blocking hardware from generating new page faults and flushing all in-flight ones. Therefore, moving iopf_for_domain_remove() after this function should resolve this.
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= 6.16CVSS 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 · scopedLinux kernel 6.17 or later stable release containing commit c68332b7ee893292bba6e87d31ef2080c066c65d
- 1. Identify the current kernel version running on affected systems using 'uname -r'
- 2. Obtain a kernel upgrade to a version that includes the fix commit c68332b7ee893292bba6e87d31ef2080c066c65d
- 3. For production systems: Before deploying, test the new kernel in a staging environment to ensure compatibility with hardware and existing workloads
- 4. Schedule a maintenance window for the kernel upgrade
- 5. After upgrading, verify the fix is applied by checking that 'intel_pasid_tear_down_entry()' is called before 'iopf_for_domain_remove()' in the source code (if auditing is required)
- 6. Monitor system logs for any recurrence of the UAF/underflow warnings
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-2025-38594 — 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-2025-38594 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