Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2025-39748
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: bpf: Forget ranges when refining tnum after JSET Syzbot reported a kernel warning due to a range invariant violation on the following BPF program. 0: call bpf_get_netns_cookie 1: if r0 == 0 goto <exit> 2: if r0 & Oxffffffff goto <exit> The issue is on the path where we fall through both jumps. That path is unreachable at runtime: after insn 1, we know r0 != 0, but with the sign extension on the jset, we would only fallthrough insn 2 if r0 == 0. Unfortunately, is_branch_taken() isn't currently able to figure this out, so the verifier walks all branches. The verifier then refines the register bounds using the second condition and we end up with inconsistent bounds on this unreachable path: 1: if r0 == 0 goto <exit> r0: u64=[0x1, 0xffffffffffffffff] var_off=(0, 0xffffffffffffffff) 2: if r0 & 0xffffffff goto <exit> r0 before reg_bounds_sync: u64=[0x1, 0xffffffffffffffff] var_off=(0, 0) r0 after reg_bounds_sync: u64=[0x1, 0] var_off=(0, 0) Improving the range refinement for JSET to cover all cases is tricky. We also don't expect many users to rely on JSET given LLVM doesn't generate those instructions. So instead of improving the range refinement for JSETs, Eduard suggested we forget the ranges whenever we're narrowing tnums after a JSET. This patch implements that approach.
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
Linux KernelOperating system
< 6.12.43>= 6.13, < 6.15.11>= 6.16, < 6.16.2CVSS 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 · scoped6.12.436.15.116.16.2
Linux kernel 6.12.43, 6.15.11, or 6.16.2 (or later stable release)
- 1. Obtain the Linux kernel source code for your current version
- 2. Download or cherry-pick the fix commit 2fd0c26bacd90ef26522bd3169000a4715bf151f
- 3. Apply the patch to the kernel source tree
- 4. Rebuild the kernel with the applied fix
- 5. Deploy the new kernel and reboot
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-2025-39748 — 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-2025-39748 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