CVE-2025-39674
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: scsi: ufs: ufs-qcom: Fix ESI null pointer dereference ESI/MSI is a performance optimization feature that provides dedicated interrupts per MCQ hardware queue. This is optional feature and UFS MCQ should work with and without ESI feature. Commit e46a28cea29a ("scsi: ufs: qcom: Remove the MSI descriptor abuse") brings a regression in ESI (Enhanced System Interrupt) configuration that causes a null pointer dereference when Platform MSI allocation fails. The issue occurs in when platform_device_msi_init_and_alloc_irqs() in ufs_qcom_config_esi() fails (returns -EINVAL) but the current code uses __free() macro for automatic cleanup free MSI resources that were never successfully allocated. Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000008 Call trace: mutex_lock+0xc/0x54 (P) platform_device_msi_free_irqs_all+0x1c/0x40 ufs_qcom_config_esi+0x1d0/0x220 [ufs_qcom] ufshcd_config_mcq+0x28/0x104 ufshcd_init+0xa3c/0xf40 ufshcd_pltfrm_init+0x504/0x7d4 ufs_qcom_probe+0x20/0x58 [ufs_qcom] Fix by restructuring the ESI configuration to try MSI allocation first, before any other resource allocation and instead use explicit cleanup instead of __free() macro to avoid cleanup of unallocated resources. Tested on SM8750 platform with MCQ enabled, both with and without Platform ESI support.
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 analysisThe code follows a pointer that is null, crashing the process. An attacker who can reliably trigger it turns the crash into a denial of service. The fix is checking for null before use and handling the failure path gracefully.
General guidance for the null pointer dereference 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>= 6.16, < 6.16.4= 6.17CVSS 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 · scoped6.16.4
Linux kernel 6.16.4 or later, or 6.17.x with fix
- Identify the current running Linux kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.16.4 or later, or to a 6.17.x version that includes the fix commit 6300d5c5438724c0876828da2f6e2c1a661871fc
- Reboot the system to load the updated kernel
- Verify the new kernel version is running with 'uname -r'
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-2025-39674 — 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-2025-39674 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